[Federal Register: February 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 34)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7555]
[DOCID:fr22fe10-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 558

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002]

New Animal Drugs for Use in Animal Feeds; Bacitracin Zinc;
Nicarbazin

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of an original abbreviated new
animal drug application (ANADA) filed by Alpharma, Inc. The ANADA
provides for use of single-ingredient Type A medicated articles
containing bacitracin zinc and nicarbazin to make two-way combination
drug Type C medicated feeds for broiler chickens.

DATES: This rule is effective February 22, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Harshman, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-170), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Alpharma, Inc., 440 Rte. 22, Bridgewater, NJ
08807, filed ANADA 200-478 for use of ALBAC 50 (bacitracin zinc) and
NICARB (nicarbazin) single-ingredient Type A medicated articles to make
two-way combination drug Type C medicated feeds for broiler chickens.
Alpharma, Inc.'s, ANADA 200-478 is approved as a generic copy of NADA
141-146, sponsored by Phibro Animal Health, for combination use of
BACIFERM (bacitracin zinc) and NICARB. The application is approved as
of January 21, 2010, and the regulations are amended in 21 CFR 558.366
to reflect the approval.
    In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of 21 CFR
part 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a summary of safety and
effectiveness data and information submitted to support approval of
this application may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.33 that this action is of
a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
    This rule does not meet the definition of ``rule'' in 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ``particular applicability.''
Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements
in 5 U.S.C. 801-808.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 558

    Animal drugs, Animal feeds.

0
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 558 is
amended as follows:

PART 558--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 558 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 360b, 371.

Sec.  558.366   [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  558.366, in the table in paragraph (d), in the ``Nicarbazin
in grams per ton'' column, in the entry for ``113.5 (0.0125 pct.)''
under the ``Combination in grams per ton'' column, in the entry for
``Bacitracin zinc 4 to 50,'' add ``046573'' in numeral sequence under
the ``Sponsor'' column.

    Dated: February 17, 2010.
William T. Flynn,
Acting Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 2010-3328 Filed 2-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75825-75827]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30370]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0934; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-260-AD;
Amendment 39-17293; AD 2012-25-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes. This AD was prompted
by a report of a prematurely fractured main landing gear (MLG) bogie
beam. This AD requires replacing certain MLG bogie beams before
reaching new reduced life limits. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fracture of the MLG bogie beam, which, under high speed, could
ultimately result in the airplane departing the runway, the bogie beam
detaching from the airplane, or collapse of the MLG; and consequent
structural damage to the airplane and injury to the occupants.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 30, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 30,
2013.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on September 12, 2012
(77 FR 56172). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information (MCAI) states:

    During ground load test cycles on an A340-600 aeroplane, the MLG
bogie beam has prematurely fractured.
    The results of the investigation identified that this premature
fracture was due to high tensile standing stress, resulting from dry
fit axle assembly method. Improvement has been introduced
subsequently with a grease fit axle assembly method.
    Fatigue and damage tolerance analyses were performed, whose
results demonstrated that the current life limit of certain MLG
bogie beams with dry fit axles installed on A330 aeroplanes only
must be reduced compared to the life limit stated in the A330
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1-Safe Life
Airworthiness Limitation Items revision 05 approved by EASA
[European Aviation Safety Agency] on 29 July 2010.
    Failure to comply with the reduced life limit of the MLG bogie
beam with dry fit axle might jeopardize the MLG structural
integrity.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires the
replacement of the affected MLG bogie beams before reaching the new
reduced life limit.

    The unsafe condition is a possible fracture of the MLG bogie beam,
which, under high speed, could ultimately result in the airplane
departing the runway, the bogie beam detaching from the airplane, or
collapse of the MLG; and consequent structural damage to the airplane
and injury to the occupants. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (77 FR 56172, September
12, 2012) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 56172, September 12, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 56172, September 12, 2012).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 53 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 16 work-hours per MLG bogie
beam (2 MLG bogie beams per airplane) to comply with the basic
requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Required parts will cost about $255,000 per MLG bogie beam. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts.
As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some
parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be up
to $27,174,160, or $256,360 per MLG bogie beam.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative,

on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM (77 FR 56172, September 12,
2012), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2012-25-12 Airbus: Amendment 39-17293. Docket No. FAA-2012-0934;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-260-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January 30,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223,
-243, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343
airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial
numbers (S/Ns).

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of a prematurely fractured main
landing gear (MLG) bogie beam. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fracture of the MLG bogie beam, which, under high speed, could
ultimately result in the airplane departing the runway, the bogie
beam detaching from the airplane, or collapse of the MLG; and
consequent structural damage to the airplane and injury to the
occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Bogie Beam Replacement

    At the later of the times specified in paragraph (g)(1) or
(g)(2) of this AD, replace all MLG bogie beams having part number
(P/N) 201485300, 201485301, 201272302, 201272304, 201272306, or
201272307, except those that have S/N S2A, S2B, or S2C, as
identified in Messier-Dowty Service Letter A33-34 A20, Revision 5,
including Appendices A through F, dated July 31, 2009, with a new or
serviceable part, in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, or European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its
delegated agent).
    (1) Before the accumulation of the flight hours or landings,
whichever occurs first, specified in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD, as applicable to airplane type, model, and weight variant
(WV).

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD--MLG Bogie Beam Life Limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Life limit from first installation of MLG bogie beam on an
            Affected airplanes--                                          airplane--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243,      50,000 landings or 72,300 total flight hours.
 weight variant (WV)02x, WV05x (except
 WV058), and WV06x series.
Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243       50,000 landings or 57,900 total flight hours.
 WV058.
Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -    46,000 landings or 75,000 total flight hours.
 323, -341, -342, -343 WV00x, WV01x, WV02x,
 and WV05x series.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, a MLG bogie beam having any
part number identified in paragraph (g) of this AD, may be installed
on an airplane, provided its life has not exceeded the life limit
defined in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, and is replaced
with a new or serviceable part before reaching the life limit
defined in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

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

(j) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2011-0212, dated
October 31, 2011; and Messier-Dowty Service Letter A33-34 A20,
Revision 5, including Appendices A through F, dated July 31, 2009;
for related information.

(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 the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Messier-Dowty Service Letter A33-34 A20, Revision 5,
including Appendices A through F, dated July 31, 2009.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Messier-Dowty: Messier Services Americas, Customer Support Center,
45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 20166-8910; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;

Internet https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 5, 2012.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-30370 Filed 12-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 41 (Monday, March 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 12313]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0044]

Certificate of Alternative Compliance for the M/V PELICAN II

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of issuance of a certificate of alternative
compliance.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that the Chief of Prevention
Division, Seventh District has issued a certificate of alternative
compliance from the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions
at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), for the M/V PELICAN II (O.N. 1296903). We
are issuing this notice because its publication is required by statute.
Due to the construction and placement of the masthead light, stern
light, and sidelights, M/V PELICAN II cannot fully comply with the
light, shape, or sound signal provisions of the 72 COLREGS without
interfering with the vessel's design and construction. This
notification of the issuance of these certificates of alternative
compliance promotes the Coast Guard's marine safety mission.

DATES: The Certificate of Alternative Compliance for the M/V PELICAN II
was issued on January 16, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information or questions about
this notice call or email LCDR Dale Cressman, D7 dpi, U.S. Coast Guard,
305-415-7148<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The United States is signatory to the
International Maritime Organization's International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), as amended. The
special construction or purpose of some vessels makes them unable to
comply with the light, shape, or sound signal provisions of the 72
COLREGS. Under statutory law, however, specified 72 COLREGS provisions
are not applicable to a vessel of special construction or purpose if
the Coast Guard determines that the vessel cannot comply fully with
those requirements without interfering with the special function of the
vessel.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 33 U.S.C. 1605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The owner, builder, operator, or agent of a special construction or
purpose vessel may apply to the Coast Guard District Office in which
the vessel is being built or operated for a determination that
compliance with alternative requirements is justified,\2\ and the Chief
of the Prevention Division would then issue the applicant a certificate
of alternative compliance (COAC) if he or she determines that the
vessel cannot comply fully with 72 COLREGS light, shape, and sound
signal provisions without interference with the vessel's special
function.\3\ If the Coast Guard issues a COAC, it must publish notice
of this action in the Federal Register.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 33 CFR 81.5.
    \3\ 33 CFR 81.9.
    \4\ 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33 CFR 81.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chief of Prevention Division, Seventh District, U.S. Coast
Guard, certifies that the M/V PELICAN II (O.N. 1296903) is a vessel of
special construction or purpose, and that, with respect to the
positions of the masthead light, stern light, and sidelights, it is not
possible to comply fully with the requirements of the provisions
enumerated in the 72 COLREGS, without interfering with the normal
operation, construction, or design of the vessel's car deck. The Chief
of Prevention Division, Seventh District, U.S. Coast Guard, further
finds and certifies that the lights are configured in closest possible
compliance with the applicable provisions of the 72 COLREGS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 33 U.S.C. 1605(a); 33 CFR 81.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33
CFR 81.18.

    Dated: January 16, 2020.
J.D. Espino-Young,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Prevention Division, Seventh Coast
Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020-04251 Filed 2-28-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Cyromazine:  Comparison of US Tolerances (40 CFR 180.414) and Various MRLs

Residue Definition

US	Codex	Canada	Mexico	European Union

Cyromazine	Cyromazine (1992 CCPR specifically excluded melamine from the defn)	N-cyclopropyl-1,3,5-

triazine-2,4,6-triamine,

including the metabolite

1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-

triamine

	Cyromazina	Cyromazine1

1 Currently undergoing review.  The most recent decisions (from the NL) indicate that the residue of concern for both enforcement and dietary intake considerations is cyromazine only.  Melamine was judged to have no significant toxicological concerns.

Commodity (US)	US Tolerance (ppm)	Codex MRL

(mg/kg)	Canada MRL

(mg/kg)	Mexico MRL

(mg/kg)	EU

(mg/kg)

Beans, dry, except cowpea	3.0

Beans, lima	1.0

Beans and peas  with pod (fresh)

5

Broccoli	1.0

Cabbage, Abyssinian	10.0

Cabbage, seakale	10.0

Cattle, fat	0.05

Cattle, kidney	0.2

Cattle, meat	0.05

0.05

Cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney	0.05

0.05

Egg	0.25	0.21

	0.2

Garlic, bulb	0.2

Garlic, great-headed, bulb	0.2

Goat, fat	0.05

Goat, kidney	0.2

Goat, meat	0.05

0.05

Goat, meat byproducts, except kidney	0.05

0.05

Hanover salad, leaves	10.0

Hog, fat	0.05

0.05

Hog, kidney	0.2

Hog, meat	0.05

Hog, meat byproducts, except kidney	0.05

0.05

Horse, fat	0.05

Horse, kidney	0.2

Horse, meat	0.05

0.05

Horse, meat byproducts, except kidney	0.05

Leafy vegetables (except Brassica)	7.0	Lettuce, head 5.

Celery 5.	Leaf lettuce 10.0

Celery  10.0

Spinach 10.0

Head lettuce 4.0	Lettuce 5	Lettuce 15

Celery 2

Cress 15

Leek	3.0

Mango	0.3

	3

	Milk	0.05	0.01 (*)1

	0.02

Mushroom	1.0	5.	8.0

5.

Onion, dry bulb	0.2

0.3

Onion, green	3.0

3.0

Onion, potato	3.0

Onion, tree	3.0

Onion, welsh	3.0

Pepper	1.0	1.	3.0	Chile pepper 4

	Potato	0.8

0.5

Dry potato products 1.5

Early potato 1

Ware potato 1

Poultry, fat (from chicken layer hens and chicken breeder hens only) 0.05

0.05

Poultry, meat (from chicken layer hens and chicken breeder hens only) 0.05	0.05 (*)1

	0.05

Poultry, meat byproducts (from chicken layer hens and chicken breeder hens only)	0.05

0.05

Rakkyo, bulb	0.2

Shallot, bulb	0.2

Shallot, fresh leaves	3.0

Sheep, fat	0.05

Sheep, kidney	0.2

Sheep, meat2	0.05	0.05 (*)1

	0.05

Sheep, meat byproducts except kidney	0.05

0.05

Tomato	0.5	0.5	1.0	1	1

Turnip greens	10.0

Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5, except broccoli	10.0

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9	1.0	Cucumbers 0.2

Melons (except watermelon) 0.2	Cucumbers 1.0

Melons 1.0	Melons 2

Watermelon 2

Cucumber 2

Squash 2 	Watermelon

0.3

Cucumber 1

Gherkins 1

Courgettes 1

Melons 0.3

Inadvertent Residues

Cotton, undelinted seed	0.1

Corn, sweet, kernels plus cob with husks removed	0.5

0.05

Corn, sweet, forage	0.5

Corn, sweet, stover	0.5

Radish, root	0.5

0.05

Radish, tops (leaves)	0.5

0.05

1 MRL accommodates external animal treatment.

2 New Zealand 0.3 mg/kg from topical application.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 63 (Friday, April 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18031-18033]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7427]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0261; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-028-AD;
Amendment 39-16648; AD 2011-07-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Model Mystere-Falcon
50 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

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

    On two occurrences on Myst[egrave]re-Falcon 50 aeroplanes in
service, it was detected that two pipes had been swapped in
maintenance at the frame 42 firewall. The swapped lines are the
extinguishing system line to engine  2, and engine
 2 Low Pressure (LP) bleed line.
    If the swapping of these two lines is not detected and
corrected, in case of engine  2 fire, the fire
extinguishing capability would not be operational.
* * * * *
    This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 18, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of April 18,
2011.
    We must receive comments on this AD by May 16, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone 425-
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2011-0025-E, dated February 18, 2011
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    On two occurrences on Myst[egrave]re-Falcon 50 aeroplanes in
service, it was detected that two pipes had been swapped in
maintenance at the frame 42 firewall. The swapped lines are the
extinguishing system line to engine  2, and engine
 2 Low Pressure (LP) bleed line.
    If the swapping of these two lines is not detected and
corrected, in case of engine

2 fire, the fire extinguishing capability would not be operational.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires an
[visual] inspection of the connection of the two lines
(extinguishing and LP bleed lines) at frame 42 in the rear
compartment and, in case of findings, proper re-installation of the
lines. This [EASA] AD requires as well reporting to Dassault
Aviation.
    This [EASA] AD is considered to be an interim measure and,
depending on the inspection results provided by operators, further
AD action may follow.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Dassault Aviation has issued Service Bulletin F50-519, dated
February 18, 2011. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
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.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because the
swapping of the number 2 engine fire extinguishing line and the number
2 engine low pressure bleed line results in a dormant failure of the
fire extinguishing capabilities of the number 2 engine. Therefore, we
determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before
issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0261; Directorate
Identifier 2011-NM-028-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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 AD:

2011-07-11 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-16648. Docket No. FAA-
2011-0261; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-028-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April
18, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model Mystere-Falcon 50
airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26: Fire
protection.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    On two occurrences on Mystre-Falcon 50 aeroplanes in service, it
was detected that two pipes had been swapped in maintenance at the
frame 42 firewall. The swapped lines are the extinguishing system
line to engine  2, and engine  2 Low Pressure (LP)
bleed line.
    If the swapping of these two lines is not detected and
corrected, in case of engine

 2 fire, the fire extinguishing capability would not be
operational.
* * * * *

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Within 8 days after the effective date of this AD: Visually
inspect the extinguishing system line and the low pressure bleed
line of the number 2 engine at frame 42 in the rear compartment to
determine proper installation of the lines, in accordance with
paragraph 2.B.(1) of the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault
Service Bulletin F50-519, dated February 18, 2011.
    (1) If the lines are properly installed, no further action is
required by this paragraph.
    (2) If the lines are improperly installed, before further
flight, do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii) of this AD, in accordance with paragraph 2.B.(1) of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519,
dated February 18, 2011.
    (i) Inspect the improperly installed lines for deformation.
    (A) If no deformation is found on the improperly installed
lines, before further flight, re-install the lines using the proper
connections, in accordance with paragraph 2.B.(1) of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519,
dated February 18, 2011.
    (B) If any deformation is found on the improperly installed
lines, before further flight, replace the lines in accordance with
paragraph 2.B.(1) of the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault
Service Bulletin F50-519, dated February 18, 2011.
    (ii) Verify the correct connection of the lines in accordance
with paragraph 2.B.(1) of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519, dated February 18, 2011.

Reporting Requirement

    (h) Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative)
of the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD to Dassault
Aviation, as specified in paragraph 2.B.(2) of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519, dated February
18, 2011. Submit the report at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. The report must include the
information identified in Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519, dated
February 18, 2011. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has approved the information collection requirements contained
in this AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the effective date of
this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No Differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be e-mailed 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: 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 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.,
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Emergency
Airworthiness Directive 2011-0025-E, dated February 18, 2011; and
Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519, dated February 18, 2011; for
related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Dassault Service Bulletin F50-519, dated
February 18, 2011, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey
07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 21, 2011.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-7427 Filed 3-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Wednesday, September 4, 2019 5:24 PM
To:
'David Ailor (dailor@accci.org)'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
FW: September 2019 QA/QC Review of Enclosure 2 Information for EPA 2016 ICR for Erie Coke (Excel file)

David - Here (below) is an example of the email I sent with Enclosure 2 (test data) for Erie. I included the file because it is small so you could see what all is included. I also included their Enclosure 1 file so you now have complete picture of what everyone is doing.

I included SunCoke in the mailout for Enclosure 2 also. Hopefully, it won't have as much trouble getting through as last time.

I've also included the file with my list of facilities for each review. Eleven facilities completed Enclosure 1 and seven facilities tested as per Enclosure 2 (and also completed Enclosure 1).

We hope to have all of the QA/QC done before the December holidays so we can start loading data into modelling file in January 2020.
I will send out reminders starting in November.

No word yet on the deadline law suit.
_____________________________________________________________
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 Gr (D 243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

<< E1&2-review-industry-addresses-9-4-19.docx >>
<< EC-Coke-Enclosure-1-Questionnaire ICR-draft summary-review-August-5-2019.xlsx >>
<< EC-EriePA-CokeOvens-Enclosure2-QA-Emissions-Data-Sept-2019-IndustryQA_EC-Erie-PA.xlsx >>

From: Jones, DonnaLee
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2019 5:07 PM
To: Bill Schneider<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: GABRIELLE RAYMOND<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: September 2019 QA/QC Review of Enclosure 2 Information for EPA 2016 ICR for Erie Coke (Excel file)

Mr. Schneider: You have been identified as a reviewer for your company's information supplied to EPA for the 2016 Information Collection Request (ICR). If you are not correct person, please forward to the current employee responsible for this review.

Thank you again for your efforts in providing your facility information. Now is the time to correct, update, or add to your responses from 2016 for Enclosure 2. Attached is your facility's information in one Excel file.
Please refer to the `Review Instructions' worksheet of the attached spreadsheet for specific review instructions.
The Enclosure 2 data are organized into three groups within the spreadsheet:
A. Air Stack Tests
B. Process Data
C. Non-Stack Test Data (e.g., Opacity, Water Tests, Material Tests, COG Tests, etc.)

Resources worksheets (tabs R-1 through R-4) also are available for your reference and use.
Please review all data compiled by the EPA Contractor. If your data is not correct, please revise or add it to the applicable worksheet. Highlight (in yellow) any changes made with any cell and describe the change in the "Facility Review Comments" column of the applicable worksheet.
If any of the currently missing information is considered "confidential business information" (CBI), please note "CBI" in the empty data cell. Then please provide this CBI information using the CBI procedures described in the original ICR letter sent by EPA in 2016. We can provide again if needed.
If you have any questions, please first send an email to BOTH Gabrielle Raymond, the EPA contractor from RTI, and me at the email addresses below. If we need to speak on the phone, we can follow-up with a call, but we need an email first to ensure contact.
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

We will be entering your Enclosure 2 data into the Coke oven RTR subpart CCCCC Modelling file soon after the first of the year 2020, so we need to get all the QA/QC work done during the Fall 2019.
Note that we will be summarizing CBI data in Enclosure 1 separately at some not yet determined point in the future.
Thank you in advance for your work, time and expense helping us get good quality data.

_____________________________________________________________
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 Gr (D 243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

			Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 9, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-16764

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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

Applicant:  Skynet Airlines Limited						Date Filed:  December 18, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to conduct (1)
scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail
between Shannon, Ireland and New York, New York (and/or Newark); (2)
charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between
Ireland and the United States, either directly or via intermediate
points in other countries, with or without stopovers; and (3) and other
charters subject to 14 CFR Part 212 of the Department’s rules.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Don H. Hainbach/Katherine M. Aldrich
202-776-3970

DOT analyst:  Shelita Smith<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved									Action date:  February 9, 2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  February 9, 2004 – February 9,
2005

Basis for approval:  We found, based on the record, that Skynet, an
Irish regional

carrier, is operationally and financially qualified to undertake the
proposed services, and properly licensed.  We also found that Skynet is
substantially owed and effectively controlled by Irish citizens.  We
found that reciprocity and our overall aviation relationship with
Ireland is sufficient to warrant approval of the requested authority.
By memorandum dated January 30, 2004, the FAA advised us that it knew of
no reason why we should act unfavorably on Skynet’s application.

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

_X_ Standard exemption conditions (attached)        __ Foreign air
carrier permit conditions (Order   -  -  )

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

We found that the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations.

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

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

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

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

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its
plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration
has determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

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

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

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

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

08/2003


[Federal Register: November 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 220)]
[Notices]
[Page 64203-64204]
[DOCID:fr15no07-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2009-105]

Virginia Electric and Power Co.; Notice of Amendment of License
and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

November 6, 2007.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters.
    b. Project No.: 2009-105.
    c. Date Filed: October 23, 2007.
    d. Applicant: Virginia Electric and Power Co. (dba Dominion North
Carolina Power).
    e. Name of Project: Roanoke Rapids and Gaston Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Roanoke River, in
Brunswick and Mecklenburg Counties, Virginia and Halifax, Warren, and
Northampton Counties, North Carolina.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Jim Thornton, Dominion Generation, Innsbrook
Technical Center, 1 NE 5000 Dominion Boulevard, Geln Allen, VA 23060,
(804) 273-3257.
    i. FERC Contact: Hillary Berlin at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing comments and or motions: December 7, 2007.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Office of the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426. Please include the project
number (P-2009-105) on any comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    k. Description of Application: Virginia Electric and Power Co.
requests permission to allow Redtail-Gaston, LLC to construct a new
120-slip boat facility on a portion of shoreline along Lake Gaston.
This boat facility will accommodate a planned residential community
(Eaton's Crossing) to be constructed on an adjacent 78.9-acre
privately-owned parcel in Littleton, Warren County, North Carolina.
Redtail-Gaston, LLC proposes the following activities along
approximately 6,500 linear feet of the Lake's shoreline: (1) Resurface
and repair an existing boat ramp, (2) construct a finger pier alongside
the boat ramp, (3) construct two, 10-slip dock structures, (4)
construct five, 20-slip covered boathouses, and (5) remove trash and
debris from four existing beaches. Redtail-Gaston, LLC also proposes
various measures for protection and enhancement of environmental
resources, including erosion and sediment control measures and a
forested riparian buffer along the shoreline. No dredging activities
are proposed.
    l. Location of Application: A copy of the application is available
for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,
or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''

link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be

notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'',
``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project
Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    p. Agency Comments: Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file

comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be
obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not
file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be
presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must
also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov

under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-22288 Filed 11-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 7701]
[DOCID:fr16fe07-141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55264; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-45]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC.;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to Exchange
Rule 638 Concerning Mediation

February 9, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On June 22, 2006, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change relating to amendments to
Exchange Rule 638 concerning mediation. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on December 21, 2006,\3\
and the Commission received one comment on the proposal.\4\ This order
approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 54917 (Dec. 11, 2006), 71 FR
76714 (Dec. 21, 2006).
    \4\ See letter from Stephen A. Hochman to Nancy Morris, dated
January 16, 2007 (``Hochman'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The proposal would delete references in NYSE Rule 638 to the
mediation pilot program that expired on January 31, 2003. The proposed
amendments would also codify or, in some cases, recodify certain
existing mediation procedures, including that: (1) The mediator's fees
and method of payment are subject to agreement of the parties and the
mediator, and all such fees and costs incurred in mediation are the
parties' responsibility; (2) an adjournment fee will be assessed if an
arbitration hearing is adjourned for purposes of the parties pursuing
mediation unless the fee is waived under Exchange Rule 617; (3) a
mediator may not represent a party or act as an arbitrator in an
arbitration relating to the matter mediated, nor be called to testify
regarding the mediation in any proceeding;\5\ and (4) the mediation is
confidential and no record is kept of the proceeding,\6\ and, except as
may be required by law, the parties and mediator agree not to disclose
the substance of the mediation without the prior written authorization
of all parties to the mediation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See current NYSE Rule 638(a)(4).
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule change would clarify that any party
may withdraw from mediation at any time prior to the execution of a
settlement agreement upon written notification to all other parties,
the mediator, and the Director of Arbitration. It also would clarify
that parties may select a mediator on their own or request a list of
potential mediators from the Exchange, and that, upon request of any
party, the Director of Arbitration would send the parties a list of
five potential mediators together with the mediators' biographical
information described in Rule 608.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See current NYSE Rule 638(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change would provide that the parties
will advise the Exchange as to the name of the agreed-upon mediator. In
addition, it would clarify that once the parties agree to mediate, the
Exchange would facilitate the mediation, if requested, by contacting
the mediator selected and by assisting in making necessary
arrangements, as well as that parties to mediation may use the Exchange
meeting facilities in New York, when available, without charge.

III. Summary of Comment

    The Commission received one comment on the proposal.\8\ The
commenter objected to the provision of the proposed rule change that
would prohibit a mediator from acting as an arbitrator in an
arbitration related to the matter mediated.\9\ The NYSE responded that
because the provision is substantially the same as in the current rule
this comment is outside the scope of this rule filing.\10\ The
Commission finds the NYSE's determination that these comments are
beyond the scope of the rule filing to be reasonable because they
suggest substantive changes from the current mediation rules that were
not intended to be addressed by this rule filing. Thus, the Commission
finds the NYSE's determination not to amend the proposed rule change in
connection with this comment at this time to be reasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Hochman.
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ See letter from Mary Yeager, Assistant Secretary, NYSE, to
Katherine A. England, Assistant Director, Division of Market
Regulation, dated February 7, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act and, in particular, with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among other things, that the NYSE's
rules be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.\11\ The
Commission believes that the proposed rule change will bring greater
clarity to the mediation process by deleting outdated references to the
expired mediation pilot program and codifying certain existing
mediation procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\12\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2006-45), be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-2721 Filed 2-15-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 240 (Friday, December 17, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71589-71592]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27289]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1067; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00857-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type
Certificate Previously Held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
(CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Airbus Canada Limited Partnership Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-
500-1A11 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that some
tie-rod assemblies may have been over-tightened during the installation
of interior monuments (such as galleys, lavatories, and forward stowage
or wardrobes). This proposed AD would require adjusting the tie-rod
assemblies, as specified in a Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA)
AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 31,
2022.

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 TCCA material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in
this AD, contact TCCA, Transport Canada National Aircraft
Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. 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>. It is also available in the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-1067.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1067; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Antariksh Shetty, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-1067; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00857-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

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

Background

    The TCCA, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued
TCCA AD CF-2021-25, dated July 22, 2021 (TCCA AD CF-2021-25) (also
referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain
Airbus Canada Limited Partnership Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report that some tie-rod
assemblies may have been over-tightened during the installation of
interior monuments (such as galleys, lavatories, and forward stowage or
wardrobes). The FAA is proposing this AD to address over-tightened
(pre-loaded) tie-rods that induce unwanted stress in a monument and may
cause the monument to become unconstrained in an emergency landing,
potentially blocking exits or injuring occupants. See the MCAI for
additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    TCCA AD CF-2021-25 specifies procedures for, among other actions,
adjustment of the affected tie-rod assemblies to remove any pre-load.
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

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after
determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to
exist or develop in other products of these same type designs.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in TCCA AD CF-2021-25 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD and
except as discussed under ``Difference Between this Proposed AD and the
MCAI.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate TCCA AD CF-2021-25 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
TCCA AD CF-2021-25 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Service information required by TCCA AD CF-2021-25
for compliance will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1067 after the FAA final
rule is published.

Difference Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    TCCA AD CF-2021-25 specifies an inspection of the tie-rod for pre-
load. The service information required by TCCA AD CF-2021-25 specifies
that it ``gives the procedure to inspect and release the load the tie-
rod assemblies,'' but does not include any specific inspection
procedures. This proposed AD does not propose to include any
inspection.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 21 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                 Labor cost                               Parts cost                  product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425..........  None..............................            $425          $8,925
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type Certificate Previously Held
by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.):
Docket No. FAA-2021-1067; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00857-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by January 31, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type
Certificate Previously Held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
(CSALP); Bombardier, Inc.) Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Transport
Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD CF-2021-25, dated July 22, 2021
(TCCA AD CF-2021-25).

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that some tie-rod assemblies
may have been over-tightened during the installation of interior
monuments (such as those for the galleys, lavatories, and forward
stowage or wardrobes). The FAA is issuing this AD to address over-
tightened (pre-loaded) tie-rods that induce unwanted stress in the
monument and may cause the monument to become unconstrained in an
emergency landing, potentially blocking exits or injuring occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, TCCA AD CF-2021-25.

(h) Exceptions to TCCA AD CF-2021-25

    (1) Where TCCA AD CF-2021-25 refers to hours air time, this AD
requires using flight hours.
    (2) Where TCCA AD CF-2021-25 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The inspection specified in the Corrective Actions paragraph
of TCCA AD CF-2021-25 does not apply to this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

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

(j) Related Information

    (1) For TCCA AD CF-2021-25, contact TCCA, Transport Canada
National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean,
Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. 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
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-1067.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Antariksh
Shetty, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA,
New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on December 6, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-27289 Filed 12-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 21, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12247-12249]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05663]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2018 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0229; Special Conditions No. 25-720-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
Airplane; Flight Envelope Protection: Normal Load Factor (g) Limiting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc.
(Bombardier) Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to
the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for
transport-category airplanes. This design feature will use a fly-by-
wire electronic flight control system (EFCS) that will prevent the
flight crew from inadvertently or intentionally exceeding the positive
or negative airplane limit-load-factor. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional
safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to
establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on Bombardier Inc. on March 21, 2018.
Send your comments by May 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0229
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478).
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Jacobsen, FAA, Airplane and Flight
Crew Interface Section, AIR-671, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, 2200 S. 216th St.,
Des Moines, Washington 98198-6547; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile
425-231-3398.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The substance of these special conditions
has been published in the Federal Register for public comment in
several prior instances with no substantive comments received.
Therefore, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment
are unnecessary, and finds that, for the same reason, good cause exists
for adopting these special conditions upon publication in the Federal
Register.

Comments Invited

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

Background

    On May 30, 2012, Bombardier applied for an amendment to Type
Certificate No. T00003NY to include the new Models BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 airplanes. The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes,
which are derivatives of the BD-700 series currently approved under
Type Certificate No. T00003NY. The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes augment the existing BD-700 family of airplane and are
marketed as the Bombardier Global 7000 and Global 8000 airplanes,
respectively. These are business jets with a maximum certified
passenger capacity of 19. The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes will have a maximum takeoff weight of 106,250 lbs. and
104,800 lbs., respectively.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Bombardier must show that the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 airplanes meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate No. T00003NY or the applicable regulations
in effect on the date of application for the change except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to

include any other model that incorporates the same novel or unusual
design feature, or should any other model already included on the same
type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or unusual
design feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other
model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes must comply
with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34
and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under 21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will incorporate
the following novel or unusual design feature:
    The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will use a fly-by-
wire electronic flight control system (EFCS) that will prevent the
flight crew from inadvertently or intentionally exceeding the positive
or negative airplane limit-load-factor. This feature is considered
novel or unusual because the current regulations do not provide
standards for maneuverability and controllability evaluations for such
systems. Therefore, special conditions are needed to ensure adequate
maneuverability and controllability when using this design feature.

Discussion

    Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, part 25 does not specify
requirements or policy for demonstrating maneuver control that impose
any handling qualities requirements beyond the design limit structural
loads. Nevertheless, some pilots have become accustomed to the
availability of this excess maneuver capacity in case of extreme
emergency such as upset recoveries or collision avoidance.
    As with previous fly-by-wire airplanes, the FAA has no regulatory
or safety reason to prohibit a design for an electronic flight control
system with load factor limiting. It is possible that pilots accustomed
to this feature feel more freedom in commanding full-stick displacement
maneuvers because of the following:
    a. Knowledge that the limit system will protect the structure,
    b. Low stick force/displacement gradients,
    c. Smooth transition from pilot elevator control to limit control.
    These special conditions will ensure adequate maneuverability and
controllability when using this design feature.
    The normal load factor limit on the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 airplanes is unique in that traditional airplanes with
conventional flight control systems (mechanical linkages) are limited
in the pitch axis only by the elevator surface area and deflection
limit. The elevator control power is normally derived for adequate
controllability and maneuverability at the most critical longitudinal
pitching moment. The result is that traditional airplanes have a
significant portion of the flight envelope wherein maneuverability in
excess of limit structural design values is possible.
    These special conditions for the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes supplement the applicable regulations, including Sec.
25.143, to accommodate the unique features of the flight envelope
limiting systems, and establish an equivalent level of safety to the
existing regulations.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. Should Bombardier apply at
a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another
model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, these
special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. It is not a rule of
general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

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

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Model Bombardier BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 airplanes.

Flight Envelope Protection: Normal Load Factor (g) Limiting

    1. To meet the intent of adequate maneuverability and
controllability required by Sec.  25.143(a), and in addition to the
requirements of Sec.  25.143(a) and in the absence of other limiting
factors, the following special conditions based on Sec.  25.333(b)
apply:
    a. The positive limiting load factor must not be less than:
    (1) 2.5g for the normal state of the electronic flight control
system with the high lift devices retracted.
    (2) 2.0g for the normal state of the electronic flight control
system with the high lift devices extended.
    b. The negative limiting load factor must be equal to or more
negative than:
    (1) Minus 1.0g for the normal state of the electronic flight
control system with the high lift devices retracted.
    (2) 0.0g for the normal state of the electronic flight control
system with high lift devices extended.
    c. Maximum reachable positive load factor, wings level, may be
limited by by the characteristics of the electronic flight control
system or flight envelope protections (other than load factor
protection) provided that
    (1) the required values are readily achievable in turns, and
    (2) wings-level pitch up is satisfactory.
    d. Maximum achievable negative load factor may be limited by the
characteristics of the electronic flight control system or flight
envelope protections (other than load factor protection) provided:
    (1) Pitch down responsiveness is satisfactory, and
    (2) From level flight, 0g is readily achievable or alternatively, a
satisfactory trajectory change is readily achievable at operational
speeds. For the FAA to consider a trajectory change as satisfactory,
the applicant should propose and justify a pitch rate that provides
sufficient maneuvering capability in the most critical scenarios.
    e. Compliance demonstration with the above requirements may be
performed without ice accretion on the airframe.
    These special conditions do not impose an upper bound for the
normal load factor limit, nor do they require that the limiter exist.
If the limit is set at a value beyond the structural design limit
maneuvering load factor ``n'' of Sec. Sec.  25.333(b) and 25.337(b) and
(c), there should be a very obvious positive tactile feel built into
the controller so that it serves as a deterrent to inadvertently
exceeding the structural limit.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on March 15, 2018.
Victor Wicklund,
Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-05663 Filed 3-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P