[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 79 (Monday, April 27, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19027-19029]
[FR Doc No: E9-9501]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0380; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-153-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Model Falcon 2000EX Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    An internal review of design data has shown that the web of the
left hand side (LH) stringer 13 near frame 8 might have been
improperly trimmed on a few aircraft.
    If not corrected, possible crack initiations could occur in the
upper stringer web, and therefore could impair the structural
strength of the adjacent door stop. This latent failure could
ultimately lead to the loss of redundancy of the door stops, thereby
affecting the structural integrity of the fuselage.
* * * * *
The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 27, 2009.

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.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket 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:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0380;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-153-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0143, dated July 31, 2008 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    An internal review of design data has shown that the web of the
left hand side (LH) stringer 13 near frame 8 might have been
improperly trimmed on a few aircraft.
    If not corrected, possible crack initiations could occur in the
upper stringer web, and therefore could impair the structural
strength of the adjacent door stop. This latent failure could
ultimately lead to the loss of redundancy of the door stops, thereby
affecting the structural integrity of the fuselage.
    Computational analysis has revealed a substantial reduced
fatigue life for the stringer abutting onto the improperly trimmed
web and has determined the need for an inspection and repair action
no later than the first ``C'' check.
    To address this unsafe condition, the present Airworthiness
Directive (AD) mandates an inspection and a conditional rework or
replacement of the web of the LH stringer 13 between frames 7 and 8.

Required actions include measuring the trimmed length of the web,
inspecting for any sharp and unprotected edges of the web, and doing
corrective actions if necessary. Corrective actions include reworking
the web, applying protection to the web, and replacing the web, if
improperly trimmed. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Dassault has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin F2000EX-178, dated
July 1, 2008. 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 Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to 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 proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed 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 proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 12 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $960, or $80 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2009-0380; Directorate Identifier
2008-NM-153-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by May 27, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Dassault Model Falcon 2000EX airplanes,
certificated in any category, serial numbers 102 through 124
inclusive.

Subject

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

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    An internal review of design data has shown that the web of the
left hand side (LH) stringer 13 near frame 8 might have been
improperly trimmed on a few aircraft.
    If not corrected, possible crack initiations could occur in the
upper stringer web, and therefore could impair the structural
strength of the adjacent door stop. This latent failure could
ultimately lead to the loss of redundancy of the door stops, thereby
affecting the structural integrity of the fuselage.
    Computational analysis has revealed a substantial reduced
fatigue life for the stringer abutting onto the improperly trimmed
web and has determined the need for an inspection and repair action
no later than the first ``C'' check.
    To address this unsafe condition, the present Airworthiness
Directive (AD) mandates an inspection and a conditional rework or
replacement of the web of the LH stringer 13 between frames 7 and 8.

Required actions include measuring the trimmed length of the web,
inspecting for any sharp and unprotected edges of the web, and doing
corrective actions if necessary. Corrective actions include
reworking the web, applying protection to the web, and replacing the
web, if improperly trimmed.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) At the later of the times in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD:
    Perform a detailed visual inspection to detect any sharp and
unprotected edges of the web of the LH stringer 13 between frames 7
and 8, and measure the trimmed length of the web, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Mandatory Service
Bulletin F2000EX-178, dated July 1, 2008.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 3,750 total flight cycles, or
within 74 months since the date of issuance of the original French
airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original
French export certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) If, during the inspection and measurement required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, any sharp or unprotected edge is found,
or if the trimmed length is 1.57 inches (40 mm) or greater, before
further flight, do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Mandatory Service
Bulletin F2000EX-178, dated July 1, 2008.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) 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. Send information 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>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal maintenance inspector
(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or
lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District
Office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0143, dated July 31, 2008; and Dassault
Mandatory Service Bulletin F2000EX-178, dated July 1, 2008; for
related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 15, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-9501 Filed 4-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 226 (Friday, November 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59434-59435]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25442]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-172, OMB Control No. 3235-0169]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Form N-5.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission

plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office
of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Form N-5 (17 CFR 239.24 and 274.5) is the form used by small
business investment companies (``SBICs'') to register their securities
under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.) (``Securities
Act'') and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.)
(``Investment Company Act''). Form N-5 is the registration statement
form adopted by the Commission for use by an SBIC that has been
licensed as such under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 or
which has received the preliminary approval of the Small Business
Administration (``SBA'') and has been notified by the SBA that the
company may submit a license application Form N-5 is an integrated
registration form and may be used as the registration statement under
both the Securities Act and the Investment Company Act. The purpose of
Form N-5 is to meet the filing and disclosure requirements of both the
Securities Act and Investment Company Act, and to provide investors
with information sufficient to evaluate an investment in an SBIC. The
information that is required to be filed with the Commission permits
verification of compliance with securities law requirements and assures
the public availability and dissemination of the information.
    The Commission did not receive any filings on Form N-5 in the last
three years (and in the three years before that, received only one Form
N-5 filing). Nevertheless, for purposes of this PRA, we conservatively
estimate that at least one Form N-5 will be filed in the next three
years, which translates to about 0.333 filings on Form N-5 per year.
The currently approved internal burden of Form N-5 is 352 hours per
response. We continue to believe this estimate for Form N-5's internal
hour burden is appropriate. Therefore, the number of currently approved
aggregate burden hours, when calculated using the current estimate for
number of filings, is about 117 internal hours per year. The currently
approved external cost burden of Form N-5 is $30,000 per filing. We
continue to believe this estimate for Form N-5's cost burden is
appropriate. Therefore, we estimate that the aggregate cost burden,
when calculated using the Commission's estimate of 0.333 filings per
year, is about $10,000 in external costs per year.
    Estimates of average burden hours and costs are made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and are not derived from a
comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Compliance with the collection of
information requirements of Form N-5 is mandatory. Responses to the
collection of information will not be kept confidential. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Riddle, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
C/O Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an
email to: [email protected].

    Dated: November 16, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25442 Filed 11-21-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7149-7151]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3161]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9630-1; EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-0093]

Notice of Workshop and Call for Information on Integrated Science
Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; call for information.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development's National
Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) is preparing an Integrated
Science Assessment (ISA) as part of the review of the primary National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oxides of nitrogen
(NOX). The scientific review that informs the ISA will
include evidence for NOX whereas the indicator for
NOX that has been used for the standard is nitrogen dioxide
(NO2). Thus, the ISA is referred to as the NOX
ISA while the standard itself is referred to as the NO2
NAAQS. This ISA is intended to update the scientific assessment
presented in the Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen--
Health Criteria (EPA 600/R-08/071), published in July 2008. Interested
parties are invited to assist the EPA in developing and refining the
scientific information base for the review of the NO2 NAAQS
by submitting research studies that have been published, accepted for
publication, or presented at a public scientific meeting.
    The EPA is also announcing that a workshop entitled ``Kickoff
Workshop to Inform EPA's Review of the Primary NO2 NAAQS''
is being organized by NCEA and the EPA Office of Air and Radiation's
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS). The workshop will
be held February 29 to March 1, 2012, in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. The workshop will be open to attendance by interested public
observers on a first-come, first-served basis up to the limits of
available space.

DATES: The workshop will be held on February 29 to March 1, 2012. All
communications and information submitted in response to the call for
information should be received by EPA by March 9, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held at U.S. EPA, 109 T.W. Alexander
Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. An EPA contractor, ICF
International, is providing logistical support for the workshop. To
register, please send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with
``NOx Kickoff Workshop'' in the subject line. The pre-registration
deadline is February 17, 2012. Please direct questions regarding
workshop registration or logistics to Courtney Skuce at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or the email address provided above. For specific questions regarding
technical aspects of the workshop see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this notice.
    Information in response to the call for information may be
submitted electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or by hand delivery/
courier. Please follow the detailed instructions as provided in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For details on the period for
submission of research information from the public, contact the Office
of Research and Development (ORD) Docket; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For technical
information, contact Tom Luben, Ph.D., NCEA, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Scott
Jenkins, Ph.D., OAQPS, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Project

    Section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act directs the Administrator to
issue ``air quality criteria'' for certain air pollutants. These air
quality criteria are to ``accurately reflect the latest scientific
knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable
effects on public health or welfare, which may be expected from the
presence of such pollutant in the ambient air * * *.'' Under section
109 of the Act, EPA is then to establish NAAQS for each

pollutant for which EPA has issued criteria. Section 109(d) of the Act
subsequently requires periodic review and, if appropriate, revision of
existing air quality criteria to reflect advances in scientific
knowledge on the effects of the pollutant on public health and welfare.
EPA is also to revise the NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the revised
air quality criteria.
    NO2 is one of six ``criteria'' pollutants for which EPA
has established NAAQS. Periodically, EPA reviews the scientific basis
for these standards by preparing an ISA. The ISA, along with additional
technical and policy assessments conducted by OAQPS, form the
scientific and technical basis for EPA decisions on the adequacy of
existing NAAQS and the appropriateness of new or revised standards.
    At the start of a NAAQS review, EPA issues an announcement of the
review and notes the initiation of the development of the ISA. At that
time, EPA also issues a request that the public submit scientific
literature that they want to bring to the attention of the Agency for
consideration in the review process. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee (CASAC), an independent scientific advisory committee
mandated by the Clean Air Act, is charged with independent expert
scientific review of EPA's draft ISAs. As the process proceeds, the
public will have opportunities to review and comment on draft
NOX ISAs. These opportunities will also be announced in the
Federal Register.
    For the review of the NO2 NAAQS being initiated by this
notice, the Agency is interested in obtaining additional new
information, particularly concerning toxicological studies of effects
of controlled exposure to NO2 on laboratory animals, humans,
and in vitro systems, as well as, epidemiologic (observational) studies
of health effects associated with ambient exposures of human
populations to NO2. EPA also seeks recent information in
other areas of NO2 research such as chemistry and physics,
sources and emissions, analytical methodology, transport and
transformation in the environment, and ambient concentrations. This and
other selected literature relevant to a review of the NAAQS for
NO2 will be assessed in the forthcoming NOX ISA.
    As part of this review of the NO2 NAAQS, EPA intends to
sponsor a workshop on February 29 to March 1, 2012, to highlight
significant new and emerging NOX research, and to make
recommendations to the Agency regarding the design and scope of the
review for the primary (health-based) NO2 standards to
ensure that it addresses key policy-relevant issues and considers the
new science that is relevant to informing our understanding of these
issues. In addition, other opportunities for submission of new peer-
reviewed, published (or in-press) papers will be possible as part of
public comment on the draft ISAs that will be reviewed by CASAC. We
intend that workshop discussions will build upon three prior
publications or events (please see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_index.html to obtain a copy of these and other
related documents): (1) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (40 CFR Parts 50 and 58, February 9,
2010). The preamble to the final rule included detailed discussions of
policy-relevant issues central to the last review; (2) Integrated
Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen--Health Criteria (EPA 600/R-
08/071, July 2008); and (3) Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the
Review of the NO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (EPA 452/R-08/008a, November 2008).
    Based in large part on the input received during this workshop, EPA
will develop a draft integrated NO2 NAAQS review plan that
will outline the schedule, process, and approaches for evaluating the
relevant scientific information and addressing the key policy-relevant
issues to be considered in this review. The CASAC will be asked to
conduct a consultation with the Agency on the draft integrated review
plan, and the public will have the opportunity to comment on it as
well. The final integrated review plan will be used to frame each of
the major elements of the NO2 review under the NAAQS review
process: an integrated science assessment document, a risk/exposure
assessment report, and a policy assessment.

II. How to Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-
0093 by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Research and Development (ORD) Docket
(Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The ORD Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA West Building, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide comments by
mail or hand delivery, please submit three copies of the comments. For
attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the
comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2012-0093. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will
be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is
EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket
without change and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,

e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other materials, such as copyrighted material, are
publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the ORD Docket in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: February 6, 2012.
Rebecca Clark,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2012-3161 Filed 2-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


SECTION I: PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) TITLE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION " CLEAN WATER ACT STATE REVOLVING FUND PROGRAM" ( OMB Control number 2040 0118, EPA ICR No. 1391.07)

1( b) SHORT CHARACTERIZATION ( ABSTRACT)

The information collection activities will occur primarily at the program level through the State " Intended Use Plan" and " Annual Report". The information is needed annually to implement Section 606 of the Clean Water Act ( CWA). The Act requires the information to ensure national accountability, adequate public comment and review, fiscal integrity, and consistent management directed to achieve and report environmental outcomes and benefits.

The individual information collections are described as follows:

a. Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / State Intended Use Plan The capitalization grant agreement and application is the principal instrument by which the State commits to manage its revolving fund program in conformity with the requirements of the CWA. The grant agreement contains or incorporates by reference the IUP, application materials, payment schedule, and required certifications. Information on hardship grants, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise ( DBE), environmental indicators, environmental benefits, core measurements, and funding framework can be found in the IUP. The grant agreement is a general instrument to legally commit the State and EPA to execute their responsibilities under the Act.

b. Annual Report The annual report indicates how the State has met the goals and objectives of the previous fiscal year as stated in the IUP and grant agreement. The Report provides information on loan recipients, loan amounts, loan terms, hardship grants, DBE, environmental indicators, environmental benefits, core measurements, funding framework, project categories of eligible costs, and similar data on other forms of assistance, and is needed for input into the SRF National Information Management System. The Report also describes the extent to which the existing SRF financial operating policies, alone or in combination with other State financial assistance programs, will provide for the long term fiscal health of the Fund and carry out other provisions specified in the State Clean Water Strategy.

c. State Annual Audit The State annual audit report will contain opinions on the financial statements of the SRF and reports on the internal controls, and whether the SRF program compliance requirements have been met. Separate financial audits may be done in conjunction with the guidelines of the Single Audit Act of 1996.

d. Applications for SRF Financing Assistance Local communities have a responsibility for preparing and submitting applications for SRF assistance to their respective State agency which manages the SRF program. The State has sole responsibility for reviewing the applications, entering into loan and other financing arrangements with applicants, and otherwise managing operations of the SRF.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) NEED/ AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION The Clean Water Act, as amended by " The Water Quality Act of 1987" ( 33 U. S. C. 1381 1387 et. seq.), created a Title VI which authorizes grants to States for the establishment of State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds ( SRF's). The information activities are pursuant to Section 606 of the Act, EPA Initial Guidance for State Revolving Funds ( January 1988), and SRF Interim Final Rule ( March 1990).

The 1987 Act declares that water pollution control revolving loan funds shall be administered by an instrumentality of the State subject to the requirements of the Act. This means that each State has a general responsibility for administering its revolving fund, and must take on certain specific responsibilities in carrying out its administrative duties.

2( b) USE/ USERS OF THE DATA In order for a State to receive a capitalization grant for its revolving fund, it must enter into an agreement ( Capitalization Grant Agreement) with the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). State responsibilities include: a. Contributing 20 Percent Matching Funds; b. Committing Funds Expeditiously; c. Jointly Establishing a Payment Schedule With the Federal Government; d. Ensuring That Enforceable Requirements are Fulfilled Before Assistance is Provided to 2 Recipients for Other Purposes; and e. Monitoring Assistance Recipient Compliance With Program Requirements and Other Federal Crosscutting Authorities During the Period of the Assistance Agreement.

A State, as a federal grant recipient, must also agree to follow generally accepted government accounting standards. A State is expected to have an annual financial audit conducted and must assure that assistance recipients adhere to appropriate accounting and auditing procedures.

The information to be provided to EPA by the States include: a. Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan; b. Annual Report; c. State Annual Audit; and d. Application for SRF Financing Assistance.

Upon approval of the capitalization grant application, each State has the responsibility to establish its State Revolving Fund ( SRF) program. Once the SRF is operational, the State will receive and review applications for SRF financing assistance submitted by local communities. The State will review the applications for conformance with the SRF Intended Use Plan, environmental impacts, and financial capability of the applicant. For those projects funded with monies directly made available by the Federal capitalization grant, the State will also review the proposed project for consistency with applicable Title II requirements and other Federal cross cutting authorities as described in the SRF Initial Guidance and other SRF program materials. The specific procedures for preparation and review of application materials will be developed by each State. If an application is acceptable, the State prepares the appropriate loan agreement documents.

Although EPA oversees the general operations of the SRF programs as part of its Annual Review process, the Agency does not have any responsibility for reviewing or approving individual applications for SRF financial assistance.

3. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 3( a) RESPONDENTS/ SIC CODES State and local governments; local communities and tribes ( SIC Code # 99)

3( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED 3 ( i) Data Items In general, the information collections are required to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Clean Water Act and to ensure that self sufficient SRF programs are established in perpetuity. These information elements also provide the accountability needed to detect and remedy situations of waste, fraud, and abuse of Federal funds.

The individual information collections are described as follows:

a. Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / State Intended Use Plan The capitalization grant application is made on EPA short form No. 5700 33 ( OMB No. 2030 0020). The minimal increase in State burden associated with use of this form is being handled separately by the Grants Administration Division in their information collection budget request.

The SRF Management Manual includes a model IUP which should improve program efficiency and reduce the burden on States and EPA Regions.

b. Annual Report Section 606 ( d) requires the States to submit an annual report at the end of each fiscal year that identifies how the State has met the goals and objectives of the previous fiscal year as stated in the IUP and grant agreement. The annual report provides information on loan recipients, loan amounts, loan terms, DBE, environmental benefits, project categories, and similar data on other forms of assistance. The annual report describes the extent to which the existing SRF financial operating policies, alone or in combination with other State Financial assistance programs, will provide for the long term fiscal health of the Fund and carry out other provisions specified in the grant operation agreement.

To reduce the burden on the States, EPA developed a model annual report, patterned after the model IUP. This model is included in the SRF Management Manual.

c. State Annual Audit Most States have agreed to conduct or to have conducted a separate independent financial audit of the SRF Program, which will provide opinions on the financial statements, and a report on the internal controls and compliance with program requirements. The remaining States will be covered by audits conducted under the 4 requirements of the Single Audit Act by the EPA Office of Inspector General.

d. Applications for SRF Financing Assistance Local communities and other eligible entities have to prepare and submit applications for SRF assistance to their respective State Agency which manages the SRF program. Title VI outlines eligibilities under the SRF program in terms of potential recipients, types of projects and activities which may receive SRF assistance, and the types of financial assistance which an SRF may provide. The Clean Water Act provides significant flexibility to the States regarding the development of specific procedures for reviewing and approving applications for SRF assistance and for managing the SRF program.

Specific reporting requirements which are statutorily based relate only to the relationship between the State as recipient of the Federal capitalization grant and the Agency as grantor. Similarly, the SRF Initial Guidance, the Interim Final Rule, SRF Management Manual, and other SRF program materials do not provide guidance or direction to the States regarding the development of application materials or specific procedures for the processing and disposition of applications for SRF assistance.

Generally, the applications for SRF assistance require local communities to provide the following information: o Project description; o Project cost estimate; o Estimated construction schedule; o Projected disbursement schedule; o Description of environmental benefits; o Estimation of cost impacts on users; o Identification of repayment source; o Description of community financial capability; and o For certain projects, certifications and demonstrations regarding compliance with applicable Title II requirements and other Federal cross cutting authorities.

( ii) Respondent Activities The respondents ( State and local governments) prepare and submit the following in order to apply for Federal financial assistance: o Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan; o Annual Report; o State Annual Audit; and 5 o Applications for SRF Financing Assistance.

4. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 4( a) AGENCY ACTIVITIES The Agency reviews the submissions from the State and local governments and analyzes the data provided on the Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan in order to base its decisions for approval. The Agency reviews the annual reports and the annual audits from each state to ensure that the intended financial and programmatic objectives of the program are being met.

4( b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT The SRF Management Manual includes a model agreement which draws from the existing Construction Grant Agreement. Use of this example is likely to reduce the information burden on States and EPA Regions.

Section 606( c) requires the State to prepare a plan identifying the intended uses of the funds in the SRF and describing how those uses support the goals of the SRF. This Intended Use Plan ( IUP) must be submitted annually, after the State has provided an opportunity for public comment and review. The primary purpose of the IUP is the identification of proposed annual intended uses of the amounts available to the SRF. The secondary purpose of the IUP is the facilitation of the negotiation process for the capitalization grant agreement and schedule of grant payments ( Section 606( b)).

Under section 606( c)( l), the IUP must contain a list of publicly owned treatment works projects on the State's priority list that are eligible for SRF construction assistance. This IUP list includes: the community name; the permit number or other applicable enforceable requirement; the type of financial assistance; and the projected amount of eligible assistance.

Under section 606( c)( 2), the State must describe long and short term goals and objectives of its water pollution control revolving fund.

Under section 606( c)( 3), the IUP must include information on the types of activities to be supported by the SRF. 6 Section 606( c)( 4) requires that assurances and specific proposals be contained in the IUP to describe how the State intends to meet the following requirements:

 Section 602( a) State certification that it will conduct environmental reviews on treatment works projects and submit the specific procedures it will use.

 Section 602( b)( 3) State certification that it will enter into binding commitments. The estimated schedule for the binding commitments is a part of the IUP.

 Section 602( b)( 4)  State certification that all funds in the SRF will be expended in an expeditious and timely manner.

 Section 602( b)( 5) State identification of all projects expected to be funded with " first use" funds to meet the enforceable requirements of the Act. All States have certified compliance with this requirement.

 Section 602( b)( 6) State certification that it will ensure compliance with Title II requirements. In cases where the State will not be following EPA regulations, it will submit a description of its own specific procedures for ensuring that the Title II requirements are met. It is expected that individual State procedures will not differ substantially from procedures already being followed by all the delegated States.

Section 606( c)( 5) requires that the IUP describe the criteria and methods established for the distribution of the SRF funds. The first part describes the distribution of the various types of assistance offered by the State ( e. g., loans, guarantees, insurance, refinancing of existing debt, leveraging). The second part describes the process the State will use to select section 212 POTW construction projects from the project priority list, and projects or programs to be funded as eligible activities for nonpoint source ( NPS) and estuary protection management programs. This section also includes how the State will provide opportunity for public comment and review of the IUP before submitting it in final form to EPA.

Except for the NPS and estuarine management programs under Sections 319 and 320, the procedures for selecting projects from the State priority list and for providing for public participation have already been established under the existing Construction Grant Program. Therefore, the burden connected with this part of the IUP will also be minimal. 7 Payment Schedule  Based on its projection of binding commitments in its Intended Use Plan, the State must propose a draft payment schedule. The payment schedule and the specific criteria establishing the conditions under which the State may draw cash from its Automated Clearing House ( ACH) system ( which is a portion of the Automated Standard Application for Payments system) must be jointly established by EPA and the State. A schedule of estimated disbursements is also required to allow a forecast of the amount of funds to be drawn from the ACH during the upcoming Federal fiscal year. This forecast is necessary to plan the outlay of Federal funds from the Treasury due to the Title VI program.

In its Annual Report, the State verifies that it has:

 Reviewed all SRF funded section 212 projects in accordance with the approved environmental review procedures ( section 602( a));

 Deposited its matching funds on or before the date on which each EPA quarterly grant payment was made ( section 602( b)( 2));

 Made binding commitments to provide assistance equal to 120 percent of the amount of each grant payment within one year after receiving the grant payment ( section 602( b)( 4));

 Expended all monies in the fund in an expeditious and timely manner ( section 602( b)( 4));

 First used all monies in the fund as a result of capitalization grants to assure maintenance of progress toward compliance with the enforceable requirements of the Act ( section 602( b)( 5)); and  Complied with the Title II and other Federal crosscutting requirements applicable to those eligible treatment works funded in whole or in part before fiscal year 1995 with an amount equivalent to the capitalization grant ( section 602( b)( 6)).

Under section 606( b), at least once a year the Administrator ( through the Office of the Inspector General) will expect the State to independently conduct or to have conducted a financial and compliance audit of the SRF and its operations. The State may designate an independent auditor of the State to carry out the audit or may contractually procure the service. If the State fails to conduct the audit or if the review is unsatisfactory, the Office of Inspector General ( OIG) may arrange for an EPA audit. The OIG has developed an audit guide for SRFs, which should 8 reduce the burden on States that wish to conduct their own audits and improve the efficiency of EPA reviews.

Title VI outlines eligibilities under the SRF program in terms of potential recipients, types of projects and activities which may receive SRF assistance, and the types of financial assistance which an SRF may provide. The Clean Water Act provides significant flexibility to the States regarding the development of specific procedures for reviewing and approving applications for SRF assistance and for managing the SRF program.

Specific reporting requirements which are statutorily based relate only to the relationship between the State as recipient of the Federal capitalization grant and the Agency as grantor. Similarly, the SRF Initial Guidance, the Interim Final Rule, SRF Management Manual, and other SRF program materials do not provide guidance or direction to the States regarding the development of application materials or specific procedures for the processing and disposition of applications for SRF assistance.

The Initial Guidance and Interim Final Rule on State Revolving Funds impose virtually no requirements on States that go beyond those imposed by the Clean Water Act itself. The guidance and rule were designed to promote flexibility for States in establishing and operating their SRF programs, within the bounds of the Act.

Because the SRF is a dynamic State led program, EPA has undertaken many activities to support the Regions and States with implementation. EPA has prepared model documents relating to intended use plans, capitalization grant agreements, and annual reports. EPA Regional personnel are regularly in contact with their State counterparts and are currently working to determine efficient ways to communicate needed information and reduce the burden. The information collection activities will occur primarily at the program level through the State Intended Use Plan and Annual Report. The information is needed annually to implement Section 606 of the Clean Water Act ( CWA). The Act requires the information to ensure national accountability, adequate public comment and review, fiscal integrity, and consistent management directed to achieve environmental objectives.

4( c) SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY A majority of the reporting burden ( IUP, annual report, annual audit, etc.) is imposed on the States. For those communities/ municipalities desiring financial assistance from the SRF, they will have a smaller reporting burden requirement ( loan applications). For those small or local 9 businesses requiring assistance ( and which may be non point source), they will also prepare loan applications similar to the communities/ municipalities requirement for submittal to the State program office.

4( d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE The information collection activities will occur primarily at the program level through the State Intended Use Plan and Annual Report. The information is needed annually to implement Section 606 of the Clean Water Act ( CWA). The Act requires the information to ensure national accountability, adequate public comment and review, fiscal integrity, and consistent management directed to achieve environmental objectives.

5. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 5( a) NONDUPLICATION The information collection elements are specific to Title VI, established under the amendments to the Clean Water Act. The information in the Intended Use Plan, Annual Report, and State Audit is unique to each State participating in the SRF program. Therefore, duplication of effort is not experienced. The information activities herein are based upon program specific State sources which are not duplicated anywhere else.

5( b) CONSULTATIONS The information requirements were subjected to the same reviews as the other requirements and procedures contained in the Initial Guidance in the process of development. The Concept Paper, draft Initial Guidance, and draft Interim Final Rule were commented on by members of the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators ( ASIWPCA), other State officials, representatives of local government, private concerns involved with municipal finance, EPA Regional and Headquarters' offices, and the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB).

Some commentators objected to the level of detail required by the Draft Initial Guidance, particularly the implied need for project by project disbursement schedules. EPA is requiring the proposed payment schedule to be supported by an estimate of cash disbursements from the SRF at a level of detail sufficient to allow negotiations on the payment process. It is crucial that EPA have estimates of cash disbursements from each State in order to accurately project 10 and manage the cash outlays on a national level.

5( c) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION The statute ( Clean Water Act) requires the information to be provided at least annually. EPA is not requesting the information more frequently, although a State may submit it more frequently if it wishes ( e. g., semi annual audit instead of annual audit).

The information is indispensable for prudent administration and sound fiscal management of the State Revolving Fund Program. EPA will use the information to respond to OMB and Congressional requests and requirements for accurate analysis and projection of national budget impacts and needs. It will be relied upon by State managers for key planning decisions and by EPA managers for essential program evaluation and corrective measures.

Local communities are not required to apply for SRF assistance. Preparation of an application is only necessary if the community wishes to receive financial assistance. In view of likely funding availability at the State level, only a limited number of communities will likely receive assistance in a particular year. The impact on communities generally is quite limited.

5( d) GENERAL GUIDELINES The data collections covered by this ICR are in compliance with the OMB General Guidelines for information collections.

5( e) CONFIDENTIALITY AND SENSITIVE QUESTIONS ( i) Confidentiality No confidential data is collected.

( ii) Sensitive Questions No such information is required.

5 ( f) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB The first Federal Register Notice soliciting public comment on this ICR was published April 3, 2001. A copy of the Notice is attached to the supporting statement.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN The respondent burden estimates are based on the incremental 11 effort associated with the information collection activity. As program activity increases at the local and State level the preparation and review of local community applications for SRF assistance will likely increase.

The estimation of State respondents' burden for the four information collections are shown below:

a. Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / State Intended Use Plan We estimate that States will spend an average of 400 hours each to prepare the Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / State Intended Use Plan for submission to EPA. The information provided for hardship grants, environmental benefits, core measurements and funding framework is included in the burden hour estimate. The following chart represents the total national burden from the Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / State Intended Use Plan.

2004: 51 States X 400 hrs = 20,400 burden hours 2005: 51 States X 400 hrs = 20,400 burden hours 2006: 51 States X 400 hrs = 20,400 burden hours b. Annual Report EPA estimates that over the three year period covered by this ICR the States will spend an average of 275 hours to put together their Annual Report on the SRF program. The annual report will include information on hardship grants, DBE, environmental benefits, core measurements, funding framework, and input for the SRF National Information Management System.

2004: 51 States X 275 hrs = 14,025 burden hours 2005: 51 States X 275 hrs = 14,025 burden hours 2006: 51 States X 275 hrs = 14,025 burden hours c. State Annual Audit The estimated average burden for each State Annual Audit was 80 hours per year. It should be noted that all States are expected to have an annual financial audit of their program conducted, including opinions on the financial statements, and reports on internal controls and compliance with program requirements. This estimate is based on the extra increment of effort caused by the federal requirement. Some States will build on the Single Audit Act audits while others will simply have annual financial audits conducted on their program.

2004: 51 States X 80 hrs = 4,080 burden hours 12 2005: 51 States X 80 hrs = 4,080 burden hours 2006: 51 States X 80 hrs = 4,080 burden hours It is important to note that respondents may use SRF administrative monies to pay for costs resulting from the State Annual Audit. Section 603( d)( 7) of the Act allows money in the SRF to be used for the reasonable costs of administering the Fund, provided that the amount does not exceed four percent of the Federal grant awards received by the State SRF. If the effort required under the State Audit exceeds the requirements under the Single Audit Act, the incremental costs associated with the additional effort may be paid from the administrative monies.

d. SRF Assistance Application Preparation and Review States have total responsibility for reviewing and approving local applications for assistance from the SRF program. We estimate that States will spend an average of 40 hours in reviewing and approving each assistance application. The following chart represents the total national State burden in processing SRF assistance applications.

2004: 51 States X 54 appl. X 40 hrs = 110,160 hours 2005: 51 States X 59 appl. X 40 hrs = 120,360 hours 2006: 51 States X 64 appl. X 40 hrs = 130,560 hours States develop specific procedures and reporting and application materials for SRF assistance applicants. We estimate that local communities and tribes will spend an average of 60 hours in collecting information and preparing their SRF assistance applications. The following chart represents the total national local community burden in preparing SRF assistance applications.

2004: 2,754 Comm. X 60 hrs = 165,240 burden hours 2005: 3,009 Comm. X 60 hrs = 180,540 burden hours 2006: 3,264 Comm. X 60 hrs = 195,840 burden hours Average Annual State Burden Hours ( FY 2004 2006):

Hours Hours ICR per State all States Capitalization Grant Agreement 1,200 61,200 and Application / State Intended Use Plan Annual Report 825 42,075 13 State Annual Audit 240 12,240 Application Review 7,080 361,080 Total Burden Hrs.( FY 2004 2006) 9,345 476,595 Average Annual Burden Hours ( FY 2004 2006) 3,115 158,865 Total Local Community Burden Hours ( FY 2004 2006):

Hours Hours ICR per Comm. all Comm.

Application Preparation 180 541,620 Average Annual Local Community Burden Hours ( FY 2004 2006):

Hours Hours ICR per Comm. all Comm.

Application Preparation 60 180,540 6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS a. Costs To State Respondents The average annual State Costs for the three year period is estimated to be $ 1,642,200.

It is important to note that costs to the States are grant eligible, and therefore, are indirect Federal costs paid out of the SRF. Under section 603( d)( 7), money in the SRF may be used for the reasonable costs of administering the Fund, provided that the amount does not exceed four percent of all grant awards received by the SRF. SRF administrative monies may be used for all reasonable costs that would be eligible under section 205( g) for delegated program and project management, to the extent those types of costs are incurred for management of the SRF and for projects receiving financial assistance from the SRF. ( If actual State expenditures for administrative costs of managing the SRF exceed the four percent limit, the excess costs must be paid from other State monies.) 14 A small sample of State respondents were selected for interviews for assessing costs and hourly burden. The respondents provided estimates for the costs associated with the information collection activity. The estimates were averaged for the four individual activities involving information collections that have already been described. The averages were multiplied to reflect participation by all States in the SRF program and by the States' reported FTE ( full time employee) direct labor costs.

FY 2004 ICR # States Hours $/ Hour $ Cost Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan  Initial Plan 51 300 30.00** 459,000  Revised Plan 51 60 30.00** 91.800 Annual Report 51 175 30.00** 267,750 State Audit 51 80 30.00** 122,400 Appl. Review 51 320 30.00** 489,600 Total FY 2004 State Cost $ 1,430.550 ** State salary cost is figured at $ 25.00 per hour to cover technically trained personnel plus an additional ADP cost of $ 5.00 per hour = $ 30.00 total per hour.

FY 2005 ICR # States Hours S/ Hour $ Cost Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan  Initial Plan 51 250 30.00** 382,500  Revised Plan 51 50 30.00** 76,500 Annual Report 51 200 30.00** 306,000 State Audit 51 80 30.00** 122,400 Appl. Review 51 480 30.00** 734,400 Total FY 2005 State Cost $ 1,621,800 15 FY 2006 ICR # States Hours $/ Hour S Cost Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application / Intended Use Plan  Initial Plan 51 250 30.00** 382,500  Revised Plan 51 50 30.00** 76,500 Annual Report 51 250 30.00** 382,500 State Audit 51 75 30.00** 114,750 Appl. Review 51 600 30.00** 918,000 Total FY 2006 State Cost $ 1,874,250 Total State costs ( FY 2004 2006) $ 4,926,600 Average annual cost over 3 year period $ 1,642,200 b. COSTS TO LOCAL RESPONDENTS Local communities may incur costs in identifying and evaluating their water quality problems. Likewise, communities may need to absorb costs related to the development and evaluation of alternative planning and engineering approaches for solving the water quality problems. These planning and design costs may be eligible for SRF assistance at a State's option. For the purpose of this information collection, only the direct costs associated with preparation of the application for SRF financial assistance are reported.

During the period of this information collection activity, the SRF program will experience growth in the number of communities which receive SRF financial assistance. The number of communities in each State will vary significantly according to the funding available, the types of projects to be assisted, the average cost/ size of projects, and other factors. The Agency estimates that the number of local communities to receive SRF assistance during the period of this information collection to be as follows: 2004  54 per State; 2005  59 per State; 2006  64 per State.

Only communities which desire financial assistance from 16 the SRF will prepare applications. Therefore, this information collection will pertain only to a limited number of communities. The specific requirements and complexity of application materials varies widely among the States which are responsible for SRF program implementation and management. The Agency estimates that on average, communities will spend approximately 60 hours in completing their SRF assistance applications.

FY 2004 ICR # Communities Hours $/ Hour $ Cost Appl. Prep. 2,754 60 25.00 4,131,000 FY 2005 ICR # Communities Hours $/ Hour $ Cost Appl. Prep. 3,009 60 25.00 4,513,500 FY 2006 ICR # Communities Hours $/ Hour $ Cost Appl. Prep. 3,264 60 25.00 4,896,000 Total Local costs ( FY 2004 2006) $ 13.540,500 Average annual cost over 3 year period $ 4,513,500 6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST Estimation of the direct costs to EPA to implement the SRF Program covers negotiation and analysis of the Intended Use Plan ( including Capitalization Grant Agreement and Application), and assessment of State performance and compliance through the Annual Report and State Audit. Analysis of documents, information, and data includes receipt, validation, verification, and evaluation.

Authorization for the SRF Program currently expires in FY 1994, however, since future appropriations for the program are anticipated, States will continue to submit applications for capitalization grants. Many States are expected to make 17 modifications to their programs. These changes may include new funding approaches ( e. g., leveraging funds, alternative sources for required State matching funds), revised environmental review procedures, and alternative methods to assure compliance with program requirements. Review and approval of these changes will require Regional and, in some cases, Headquarters resources.

The estimates below reflect Agency workloads over the three year period covered by this ICR. The estimate of EPA costs is based on average hourly expenditures, including Regional and Headquarters personnel compensation and benefits. The estimates were based on participation by all States in the SRF Program.

The average annual Federal cost of $ 1,476,360 over the three year period was estimated as follows:

FY 2001 ICR Hours $/ Hour $ Cost EPA HQ Review of IUP 1,000 41.00* 41,000 and Agreement Materials ( 20 hrs per State submission)

EPA Regions' Review of IUP 17,500 34.49** 603,575 and Agreement Materials ( 350 hrs per State submission)

EPA HQ Oversight Review 1,080 41.00* 44,280 of Annual Report/ Audit ( 20 hours per State submission)

EPA Regions' Oversight 20,000 34.49** 689,800 Review of Annual Report/ Audit ( 400 hours per State submission)

Total FY 2004 Federal Cost $ 1,378,655 * GS 13/ 5, including PC& B ( personnel compensation and benefits). ** GS 12/ 5, including PC& B.

FY 2005 ICR Hours S/ Hour $ Cost 18 EPA HQ Review of IUP 750 41.00* 30,750 and Agreement Materials ( 15 hours per State submission)

EPA Regions' Review of 17,500 34.49** 603,575 IUP and Agreement Materials ( 350 hours per State submission)

EPA HQ Oversight Review 1,500 41.00* 61,500 of Annual Report/ Audit ( 30 hours per State submission)

EPA Regions' Oversight 22,500 34.49** 776,025 Review of Annual Report/ Audit ( 450 hours per State submission)

Total FY 2005 Federal Cost $ 1,4471,850 FY 2006 ICR Hours S/ Hour $ Cost EPA HQ Review of IUP 750 41.00* 30,750 and Agreement Materials ( 15 hours per State submission)

EPA Regions' Review of 17,500 34.49** 603,575 IUP and Agreement Materials ( 350 hours per State submission)

EPA HQ Oversight Review 2,000 41.00* 82,000 of Annual Report/ Audit ( 40 hours per State submission)

EPA Regions' Oversight 25,000 34.49** 862,250 Review of Annual Report/ Audit ( 500 hours per State submission)

Total FY 2006 Federal Cost $ 1,578,575 Total Federal costs ( FY 2004 2006) $ 4,429,080 19 Average annual cost over 3 year period $ 1,476,360 6( d) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS / BURDEN TABLES ( i) Respondent Burden ( FY 2004 2006)

Total State Burden Hours 476,595 Average Annual State Burden Hours 158,865 Total State Costs $ 4,925,600 Average Annual State Costs $ 1,642,200 Total Local Burden Hours 541,620 Average Annual Local Burden Hours 180,540 Total Local Costs $ 13,540,500 Average Annual Local Costs $ 4,513,500 Total Average Annual Respondents ( State and Local) 3,060 Total Average Annual Respondent ( State and local) Burden Hours 339,405 Total Average Annual Respondent ( State and Local) Cost $ 6,155,700 ( ii) The Agency Tally ( FY 2004 2006)

Total Federal Costs $ 4,429,080 Average Annual Federal Costs $ 1,476,360 Total Federal Burden Hours 127,080 Average Annual Federal Burden Hours 42,360 6( e) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN The change in the State and local respondent burden of 76,500 hours is attributed to an increased estimate on the number of respondents interested in receiving SRF 20 loans ( adjustment). The previous ICR estimated the average number of respondents to be 2,295, while this ICR estimates the average number of respondents to be 3,060. More entities will be applying for SRF loans than in previous years.

6( f) BURDEN STATEMENT Average annual State and local burden for this ICR is estimated to be 339,405 hours; and average annual Federal burden is estimated to be 42,360 hours. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to Susan Auby, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Collection Strategies Division ( Mail Code 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), 725 17th St., N. W., Washington, DC 20503, marked " Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." Comments are requested within [ Insert date 30 days after publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. Include the ICR number in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28561-28562]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12968]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0292; FRL-9963-67-OAR]

Correction to Incorporations by Reference

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action to
correct paragraph numbering in the Incorporations by Reference (IBR)
section of our regulations that specifically lists material that can be
purchased from the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
This action assigns the appropriate IBR paragraph numbers by correcting
paragraph ordering errors.

DATES:  Effective: June 23, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality
Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(E143-02), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This action corrects paragraph ordering
errors in 40 CFR 60.17(h) as highlighted in the editorial note at the
end of Sec.  60.17. The editorial note mentions that amendments could
not be incorporated into Sec.  60.17(h) as requested in a final rule
published August 30, 2016 (Revisions to Test Methods, Performance
Specifications, and Testing Regulations for Air Emission Sources (81 FR
59799)), because paragraph (h)(207) already existed as of the effective
date. This issue occurred when two rules that both added incorporation
by reference paragraphs in Sec.  60.17(h) published out of order.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing
notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that
there is good cause for making this technical amendment final without
prior proposal and opportunity for public amendment because only simple
publication errors are being corrected that do not

substantially change the agency actions taken in the final rule. Thus,
notice and public procedure are unnecessary. (See also the final
sentence of section 307(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C.
307(d)(1)), indicating that the good cause provisions in subsection
553(b) of the APA continue to apply to this type of rulemaking under
section 307(d) of the CAA.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference.

    Dated: June 2, 2017.
Sarah Dunham,
Acting Assistant Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  60.17:
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (h)(191) through (202), (204), (205), and
(207) as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Old paragraph                        New paragraph
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(h)(191)..................................  (h)(192)
(h)(192)..................................  (h)(193)
(h)(193)..................................  (h)(194)
(h)(194)..................................  (h)(195)
(h)(195)..................................  (h)(196)
(h)(196)..................................  (h)(197)
(h)(197)..................................  (h)(198)
(h)(198)..................................  (h)(199)
(h)(199)..................................  (h)(200)
(h)(200)..................................  (h)(201)
(h)(201)..................................  (h)(204)
(h)(202)..................................  (h)(209)
(h)(204)..................................  (h)(205)
(h)(205)..................................  (h)(207)
(h)(207)..................................  (h)(208)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
b. Add paragraphs (h)(191) and (h)(202).
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  60.17  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (191) ASTM D6911-15, Standard Guide for Packaging and Shipping
Environmental Samples for Laboratory Analysis, approved January 15,
2015, IBR approved for appendix A-8: Method 30B.
* * * * *
    (202) ASTM E617-13, Standard Specification for Laboratory Weights
and Precision Mass Standards, approved May 1, 2013, IBR approved for
appendix A-3: Methods 4, 5, 5H, 5I, and appendix A-8: Method 29.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2017-12968 Filed 6-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 154 (Friday, August 13, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44600-44603]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17483]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0669; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00314-T;
Amendment 39-21690; AD 2021-17-07]
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: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Canada Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 airplanes. This
AD was prompted by the potential for the flexible hose assembly of the
fuel motive flow (MF), installed between the pylon and wing, to be
installed twisted in the shroud, which can restrict the flow of fuel
for the MF and cause fuel imbalance and damage to the shroud assembly.
This AD requires inspecting for damage of the left and right MF fuel
line assemblies (including the flexible-hose and shroud assemblies),
and replacing damaged parts, as specified in a Transport Canada Civil
Aviation (TCCA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is
issuing this AD

to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 30, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 30,
2021.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by September 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact
TCCA, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra
Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0669.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0669; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jiwan Karunatilake, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-
7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    TCCA, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued TCCA
AD CF-2021-09, dated March 11, 2021 (TCCA AD CF-2021-09) (also referred
to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI),
to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Canada Limited
Partnership Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 airplanes.
    This AD was prompted by the determination that a new configuration
of the pylon-to-wing area MF flexible fuel line assembly was introduced
without revision or modification to the installation procedure,
potentially resulting in a twisted MF flexible fuel line in the shroud.
This can restrict the flow of fuel of the MF, which can cause fuel
imbalance and possible damage including abrasion to the shroud
assembly. The FAA is issuing this AD to address this condition, which
could result in the consequent abrasion of the fuel line and a possible
fuel leak; as a result, the electrical harness connectors in the wing
area could be a potential ignition source and pose a risk of fire. See
the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    TCCA AD CF-2021-09 describes procedures for a general visual
inspection for damage (including permanent deformities) of the left and
right MF fuel line assemblies (including the flexible-hose assembly and
shroud assembly), and replacement of affected MF fuel line assemblies
(including cleaning of the ends of the flexible-hose assembly,
injecting grease at both ends of the flexible-hose assembly, and
torqueing the aft end of the flexible-hose assembly). This material is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

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

Requirements of This AD

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in TCCA AD CF-
2021-09 described previously, as incorporated by reference, except for
any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA 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,
TCCA AD CF-2021-09 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD
requires compliance with TCCA AD CF-2021-09 in its entirety through
that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions
in the regulatory text of this AD. Service information required by TCCA
AD CF-2021-09 for compliance will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0669 after this AD is published.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because a twisted MF flexible fuel line in the shroud can restrict the
flow of fuel of the MF and cause fuel imbalance and possible damage
including abrasion to the shroud assembly and fuel line, resulting in a
fuel leak; as a result, the electrical harness connectors in the wing
area are a potential ignition source and pose a risk of fire. In
addition, the compliance time for the required action is shorter than
the time necessary for the public to comment and for publication of the
final rule. Therefore, the FAA finds good cause that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition,
for the reasons stated above, the FAA finds that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-

2021-0669; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00314-T'' at the beginning of
your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the final rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by
the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those
comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

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

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

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

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 5 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 work-hours x $85 per hour = $595...........................              $0             $595           $2,975
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.5 work-hour x $85 per hour = $42.50.         $20,260       $20,302.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2021-17-07 Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (Type Certificate
Previously Held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP);
Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-21690; Docket No. FAA-2021-0669;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00314-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August 30,
2021.

(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-2021-09, dated March 11, 2021
(TCCA AD CF-2021-09).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Aircraft
fuel system.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the potential for the flexible hose
assembly of the fuel motive flow (MF), installed between the pylon
and wing, to be installed twisted in the shroud, which can restrict
the flow of fuel for the MF and cause fuel imbalance and possible
damage, including abrasion, to the shroud assembly. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address this condition, which could result in
abrasion of the fuel line and a possible fuel leak; as a result, the
electrical harness connectors in the wing area could be a potential
ignition source and pose a risk of fire.

(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-2021-09.

(h) Exception to TCCA AD CF-2021-09

    (1) Where TCCA AD CF-2021-09 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where TCCA AD CF-2021-09 specifies replacing MF fuel line
assemblies, this AD requires that replacement before further flight
after any damage (including any permanent deformity) is detected.

(i) No Return of Parts

    Although the service information referenced in TCCA AD CF-2021-
09 specifies to return certain parts to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Other FAA 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 Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Airbus
Canada's TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the
DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Jiwan Karunatilake,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD CF-2021-09, dated
March 11, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For TCCA AD CF-2021-09, contact TCCA, Transport Canada
National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean,
Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0669.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on August 10, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-17483 Filed 8-11-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P