[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 233 (Monday, December 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 87424-87426]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29056]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 730, 747, 748 and 762

[Docket No. 160303182-6999-02]
RIN 0694-AG89

Amendment to the Export Administration Regulations: Removal of
Special Iraq Reconstruction License

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this final rule, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by removing the
Special Iraq Reconstruction License (SIRL) from the EAR. This action
furthers the objectives of the Retrospective Regulatory Review
Initiative that directs BIS and other federal agencies to streamline
regulations and reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on the public.
Specifically, the SIRL is outdated and seldom used by exporters, who
now have more efficient options for exports and reexports to Iraq and
transfers (in-country) in Iraq. This rule also makes conforming
changes.

DATES: This rule is effective January 4, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Andrukonis, Director, Export
Management and Compliance Division, Office of Exporter Services, Bureau
of Industry and Security, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issues this final rule to
remove the Special Iraq Reconstruction License (SIRL) provisions from
the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), consistent with the
Retrospective Regulatory Review Initiative. In the preamble to the
proposed rule published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2016 (81 FR
36481) (hereinafter ``the June 7 proposed rule'' or ``the June 7
rule''), BIS reviewed the origins of the SIRL, established in 2004 (69
FR 46070, July 30, 2004) to supplement options to facilitate exports
and reexports to Iraq and transfers within Iraq of items in furtherance
of civil reconstruction and other projects in Iraq funded by specified
entities, including the United States government. BIS also reviewed the
record of related transactions since the SIRL was established.
    The record indicates that exporters supplying items used in support
of the civil reconstruction efforts in Iraq have not relied on the SIRL
to advance those efforts, apparently because of its complexity and
narrowness. Further, since 2004, BIS processed only three applications
for the SIRL and approved only one, as compared to over 400 approved
individual license applications for the export of items to Iraq between
2012 and 2015. Finally, with the implementation of updates to the EAR,
the relative advantages of the SIRL have been offset by changes to
individual licenses and other types of authorizations offered by BIS
that provide less complex alternatives to the SIRL.
    Thus, consistent with the President's Retrospective Regulatory
Review Initiative to streamline regulations and reduce unnecessary
regulatory burdens on the public (see ``Improving Regulatory Review''
(Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011)), BIS

concluded that the SIRL proved not to be useful.
    BIS received no comments in response to the June 7 rule. BIS,
therefore, publishes in final form the amendments to the EAR to remove
the SIRL as described initially in the June 7 rule.

Export Administration Act

    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the
Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the extent permitted
by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order
13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
    2. This rule amends collections previously approved by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under Control Numbers 0694-0088,
``Simplified Network Application Processing + System (SNAP+) and the
Multi-Purpose Application,'' which carries a burden hour estimate of
43.8 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748; and 0694-0137,
``License Exemptions and Exclusions.''
    The total burden hours associated with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) and the aforementioned OMB
Control Numbers are not expected to decrease significantly as a result
of this removal of part 747 of the EAR because of the infrequent use of
part 747 of the EAR by exporters.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. The Chief Counsel for Regulation at the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy at the Small Business
Administration that this rule, if adopted, would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual
basis was published in the proposed rule and is not repeated here. BIS
received no comments, which means there were no comments that addressed
the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Therefore, a final
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and one was not
prepared.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 730

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advisory committees,
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Strategic and
critical materials.

15 CFR Part 747

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Foreign trade,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 748

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 762

    Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry,
Confidential business information, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Accordingly, under the authority of 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., parts
730, 747, 748 and 762 of the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR
parts 730-774) are amended as follows:

PART 730--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 730 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10
U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c; 22 U.S.C. 2151 note;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 15 U.S.C.
1824a; 50 U.S.C. 4305; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O.
11912, 41 FR 15825, 3 CFR, 1976 Comp., p. 114; E.O. 12002, 42 FR
35623, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 133; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12214, 45 FR 29783, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p.
256; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12854,
58 FR 36587, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12918, 59 FR 28205, 3
CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 899; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp.,
p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O.
12981, 60 FR 62981, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 419; E.O. 13020, 61 FR
54079, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 219; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p.
208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224,
66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; E.O. 13338, 69 FR 26751, 3
CFR, 2004 Comp., p 168; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129, 3 CFR, 2014 Comp.,
p. 223; Notice of November 12, 2015, 80 FR 70667 (November 13,
2015); Notice of January 20, 2016, 81 FR 3937 (January 22, 2016);
Notice of May 3, 2016, 81 FR 27293 (May 5, 2016); Notice of August
4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016); Notice of September 15, 2016,
81 FR 64343 (September 19, 2016).

0
2. Supplement No. 1 to part 730 is amended by revising the entry for
Collection number ``0694-0129''. The revision reads as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 730--Information Collection Requirements Under
the Paperwork Reduction Act: OMB Control Numbers

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Collection No.                Title         Reference in the EAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
0694-0129.....................  Export and         Sec.  Sec.   732.3,
                                 Reexport           738, 744.18,
                                 Controls For       746.3(b)(1), 750,
                                 Iraq.              758, 762, 772, 774.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 747--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
3. Remove and reserve part 747.

PART 748--[AMENDED]

0
4. The authority citation for part 748 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O.
13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR
44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 4, 2016, 81 FR
52587 (August 8, 2016).

Sec.  748.1   [Amended]

0
5. Section 748.1 is amended by removing the parenthetical phrase
``(other than Special Iraq Reconstruction License applications)'' from
the first sentence of paragraph (d).

Sec.  748.7   [Amended]

0
6. Section 748.7 is amended by removing the parenthetical phrase
``(other than Special Iraq Reconstruction Licenses)'' from paragraphs
(a) and (d).

PART 762--[AMENDED]

0
7. The authority citation for part 762 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O.
13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 4,
2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016).

Sec.  762.2  [Amended]

0
8. Section 762.2 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(17).

    Dated: November 23, 2016.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-29056 Filed 12-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register: March 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 43)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 9774-9776]
[DOCID:fr06mr09-11]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0198; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-129-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to certain Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires revisions to the airplane
flight manual (AFM) to include procedures to prohibit use of reverse
engine thrust power settings between idle and emergency maximum and to
prohibit stabilized engine operation in a certain engine speed range on
the ground. This proposed AD would continue to require revising the AFM
to include certain procedures. This proposed AD would also require
removing the normal maximum (second) detent for the reverse-thrust
control. In addition, this proposed AD would require revising the AFM
to prohibit use of reverse thrust in flight and to limit operation of
Max Reverse thrust. This proposed AD results from issuance of mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. We are proposing this AD to prevent
inadvertent operation in the prohibited stabilized engine speed range
on the ground, which could result in uncontained engine fan blade
failure due to high cycle fatigue cracking.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 6, 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 W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker
Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-
Vennep, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)252-627-350; fax +31 (0)252-
627-211; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.myfokkerfleet.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 425-227-
1152.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
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 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-2009-0198;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-129-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 because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On March 5, 1998, we issued AD 98-06-07, amendment 39-10384 (63 FR
11985, March 12, 1998), for certain Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100
airplanes. That AD requires revisions to the airplane flight manual
(AFM) to include procedures to prohibit use of reverse engine thrust
power settings between idle and emergency maximum and to prohibit
stabilized engine operation in a certain engine speed range on the
ground. That AD resulted from issuance of mandatory continuing
airworthiness information by an aviation authority of another country.
We issued that AD to prevent stabilized engine operation in a certain
engine speed range on the ground, which could result in uncontained
engine fan blade failure due to high cycle fatigue cracking.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    The preamble to AD 98-06-07 explains that we consider the
requirements ``interim action'' and were considering further
rulemaking. In concert with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA),
which is the airworthiness authority for the European Union, we now
have determined that further rulemaking is indeed necessary, and this
proposed AD follows from that determination.

Relevant Service Information

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Service Bulletin SBF100-76-014,
Revision 2, dated December 12, 2007. The service bulletin describes
procedures for removing the normal maximum (second) detent for the

reverse-thrust control. The EASA mandated the service information and
issued Airworthiness Directive 2008-0089, dated May 13, 2008 (referred
to after this as ``the MCAI''), to ensure the continued airworthiness
of these airplanes in the European Union.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the 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.
    This proposed AD would supersede AD 98-06-07 and continue to
require revising the AFM to include procedures prohibiting stabilized
engine operation in a certain engine speed range on the ground. This
proposed AD would also require removing the normal maximum (second)
detent for the reverse-thrust control. In addition, this proposed AD
would require revising the AFM to prohibit use of reverse thrust in
flight and to limit operation of Max Reverse thrust.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain a certain requirement of AD 98-06-07.
Since AD 98-06-07 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and
certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding
paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in
the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Corresponding requirement in
        Requirement in AD 98-06-07                this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (b).............................  paragraph (g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
             Action                 Work hours     Average labor     Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                   rate per hour     airplane        airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFM revision (required by AD 98-               1             $80             $80               5            $400
 06-07).........................
Removal of second detent (new                  3              80             240               5           1,200
 proposed action)...............
AFM revision (new proposed                     1              80              80               5             400
 action)........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 have 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 that the 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. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-10384 (63 FR 11985, March 12, 1998) and adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2009-0198; Directorate
Identifier 2008-NM-129-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 6,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 98-06-07.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100 airplanes,
certificated in any category, equipped with Rolls-Royce (RR) TAY
650-15 engines.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 76: Engine
controls.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from issuance of mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority
of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. We are issuing this AD to prevent inadvertent
operation in the prohibited stabilized engine speed range on the
ground, which could result in uncontained engine fan blade failure
due to high cycle fatigue cracking.

Compliance

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

Certain Requirement of AD 98-06-07

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    (g) Within 72 hours after March 27, 1998 (the effective date of
AD 98-06-07), revise the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM
to add the following. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy
of this AD in the AFM.

``LIMITATIONS POWERPLANT AND APU LIMITATIONS

OPERATING LIMITS

     To avoid high fan blade stresses, stabilized operation
in the speed range between 60% and 75% Low Pressure Rotational Speed
(N1) is not permitted during Ground Operations in Forward or Reverse
Thrust, except that passing through this range while increasing or
decreasing thrust is permitted.

THRUST REVERSER

    Thrust reversers are intended for ground use only. Intentional
use of reverse thrust in flight is prohibited. After reverse thrust
has been initiated, a full stop landing must be made.

Maximum Reverse Thrust Lever Positions

    Normal Operation:

--The idle detent position shall not be exceeded in normal
operation.
--Momentarily exceeding the idle detent position, while selecting
idle reverse, is acceptable.

    Emergency Operation:

--In case of emergency, the emergency maximum reverse thrust may be
used.
--If directional control problems occur, reduce to idle reverse or
select forward idle.
--Stabilized operation with the reverse lever in an intermediate
position between idle reverse and emergency maximum reverse is
prohibited, except (where approved) during Power-Back operations.''

    Note 1: Fokker Services Manual Change Notification--Operational
Documentation (MCNO) No. F100-006, dated November 27, 1997, contains
information that pertains to this subject. Rolls-Royce PLC Engine
Operating Instruction Manual Reference F-TAY-3RR, revised by
transmittal letter No. 13, dated October 15, 1997, also pertains to
this subject.

New Actions Required by This AD

Removal of Normal Maximum Detent

    (h) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, remove
the normal maximum (second) detent for the reverse-thrust control,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service
Bulletin SBF100-76-014, Revision 2, dated December 12, 2007.
Accomplishing the removal terminates the requirements of paragraph
(g) of this AD.
    (i) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-76-014, dated October
1, 2001; or Revision 1, dated June 1, 2002; are acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD.

AFM Revision

    (j) Concurrently with the requirements of paragraph (h) of this
AD, revise the Limitations Section of the Fokker F.28 Mark 0100 AFM
to include the following (this may be accomplished by inserting a
copy of this AD into the AFM):

``THRUST REVERSERS

    Thrust reversers are intended for ground use only. Intentional
use of reverse thrust in flight is prohibited.
    The use of Max Reverse thrust is limited to operations on short
runways or on runways with a reduced runway surface friction
coefficient or in emergency conditions. Max Reverse thrust shall not
be used at airspeeds below 60 knots except in emergency conditions.
    Reverse thrust selections between Idle Reverse thrust and Max
Reverse thrust are prohibited.''

    Note 2: Fokker Manual Change Notification--Operational
Documentation (MCNO) F100-032, Revision 1, dated September 21, 2007,
contains information related to the AFM revision required by
paragraph (j) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, 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 principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.

Related Information

    (l) The European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive
2008-0089, dated May 13, 2008, also addresses the subject of this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 20, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E9-4731 Filed 3-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32359-32361]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14143]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0153; FRL-9995-58-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: Amendments of Air Quality
Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air
Quality (DAQ), through a letter dated March 21, 2018, readopting and
amending air quality rules related to transportation conformity
requirements in the State of North Carolina. This action is being taken
pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0153 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Sheckler's
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER> . She can also be reached via
electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    EPA is proposing to approve a SIP revision submitted by DAQ,
through a letter dated March 21, 2018, seeking to readopt and amend the
air quality rules pertaining to transportation conformity in the North
Carolina SIP.\1\ North Carolina's SIP submission revises the following
North Carolina regulations in 15A NCAC 2D Section .2000: Section .2001
Purpose, Scope and Applicability, Section .2002 Definitions, Section
.2003 Transportation Conformity

Determination, and Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement.\2\ The
changes to these rules are discussed below in Section II of this
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA received the official electronic version of the
submittal on April 4, 2018. EPA has already taken action on the
other North Carolina changes submitted through the cover letter
dated March 21, 2018, in a separate action. See 84 FR 14308.
    \2\ The table at 40 CFR 52.1770(c), identifying the North
Carolina regulations approved into the SIP, labels each rule as a
``Sect.'' (i.e., Section) under the column titled ``State
citation.'' For consistency with the nomenclature used in the table,
this notice uses the term ``Section'' when referring to individual
North Carolina rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of North Carolina's Submittal

    North Carolina's General Statue (G.S.) 150B-21.3A, adopted by the
State in 2013, requires state agencies to review existing rules every
ten years. The State recently reviewed all air quality rules in 15A
NCAC 02D, Air Pollution Control Requirements.\3\ This proposed
rulemaking pertains to a SIP revision that North Carolina provided to
EPA for approval of changes to ``Section .2000--Transportation
Conformity.'' \4\ Section .2000--Transportation Conformity contains the
following five rules: Section .2001 Purpose, Scope and Applicability,
Section .2002 Definitions, Section .2003 Transportation Conformity
Determination, Section .2004 Determining Transportation-Related
Emissions,\5\ and Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement. EPA is
proposing action on the following rules: Section .2001 Purpose, Scope
and Applicability, Section .2002 Definitions, Section .2003
Transportation Conformity Determination, and Section .2005 Memorandum
of Agreement. The changes to these rules are individually described
below. If approved, none of these changes would alter the way that
transportation conformity requirements are implemented in the State of
North Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See North Carolina's SIP submission, Background and Summary,
at page I-1, available in the docket to this action.
    \4\ Transportation Conformity is required under section 176(c)
of the CAA to ensure that federally-supported highway projects,
transit projects, and other activities are consistent with (conform
to) the purpose of the SIP. Conformity currently applies to areas
that are designated nonattainment and to areas that have been
redesignated to attainment after 1990 (maintenance areas) with plans
developed under 175A of the CAA, for transportation-related criteria
pollutants including ozone, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide
and nitrogen dioxide. EPA previously approved SIP revisions from
North Carolina addressing transportation conformity requirements.
See 67 FR 78983 (December 27, 2002) and 78 FR 78266 (December 26,
2013).
    \5\ North Carolina did not request EPA approval for Section
.2004 Determining Transportation-Related Emissions as it was
readopted without changes. See March 21, 2018, Letter from DAQ,
available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section .2001 Purpose, Scope and Applicability is amended to revise
the specific areas to which conformity requirements apply in the
following manner: by removing counties and adding certain townships
listed in paragraph (b); and by clarifying in paragraph (c) that
transportation conformity requirements are applicable to any area that
is designated nonattainment or has been previously designated
nonattainment and since redesignated to attainment for the
PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See April 9, 2019 email from Matthew Davis of DAQ to Jane
Spann, Acting Chief for the Air Regulatory Management Section of the
U.S. EPA Region 4 Office (April 9, 2019 email), available in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking. The April 9, 2019 email
explains DAQ's intent to cover all nonattainment and maintenance
areas for ozone and PM2.5 in paragraph (c), while
retaining a specific list of current nonattainment townships in
paragraph (b) based on stakeholder interest. With respect to NAAQS
that are relevant for conformity purposes, EPA notes that North
Carolina currently has areas designated for maintenance for ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the changes remove provisions related to carbon monoxide
areas, which were redesignated to attainment with 10-year maintenance
plans effective November 7, 1994,\7\ and September 8, 1995,\8\ and
previously demonstrated attainment (containing motor vehicle emissions
budgets) through 2015.\9\ As federal transportation conformity
requirements no longer apply to the former carbon monoxide
nonattainment areas in North Carolina,\10\ the EPA preliminarily
concludes that there are no emissions increases associated with this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 59 FR 48399 (September 21, 1994) (redesignating the
Winston-Salem area in Forsyth County to attainment for the carbon
monoxide NAAQS and approving the first 10-year maintenance plan for
the Winston-Salem area).
    \8\ See 60 FR 39258 (August 2, 1995) (redesignating the
Charlotte area in Mecklenburg County and the Raleigh-Durham area in
Durham and Wake Counties to attainment for the carbon monoxide NAAQS
and approving first 10-year maintenance plans for both areas).
    \9\ See 71 FR 14817 (March 24, 2006) (approving second 10-year
maintenance plans through 2015 for the Winston-Salem, Charlotte, and
Raleigh-Durham carbon monoxide areas).
    \10\ See Transportation Conformity Guidance for Areas Reaching
the End of the Maintenance Period, October 2015, available at
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100KPP0.PDF?Dockey=P100KPP0.PDF. In general, transportation
conformity applies for a NAAQS during the CAA section 175A
maintenance planning period, which is the later of 20 years after
redesignation and approval of the first 10-year maintenance plan, or
the last year of a motor vehicle emissions budget established in the
second maintenance plan. Those dates were November 7, 2014 (Winston-
Salem area), September 8, 2015 (Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham areas),
and March 18, 2015 (last year of motor vehicle emissions budget for
all three areas).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rule changes also provide that--in addition to stating that
transportation conformity requirements apply for 20 years after an area
is redesignated to attainment--transportation conformity requirements
apply ``until the effective date of revocation of the conformity
requirements for the NAAQS by EPA.'' Additionally, rule .2001 is
amended to make non-substantive wording, punctuation and formatting
changes.
    After evaluation, EPA believes that the changes to North Carolina
rule .2001, when taken together, provide the appropriate applicability
for transportation conformity requirements, do not materially change
the areas to which transportation conformity applies, and are
consistent with the CAA requirements for applicable areas. EPA is
proposing to approve the changes to rule .2001 because these changes do
not alter the applicability for transportation conformity requirements
in North Carolina nor do these changes conflict with the federal
requirements for transportation conformity.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.390; 40 CFR part 93 subpart A;
Transportation Conformity Guidance for the South Coast II Court
Decision, dated November 2018, available at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100VQME.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section .2002 Definitions is amended to remove the definition of
consultation, and to make non-substantive wording, punctuation and
formatting changes (for example, to include hyphens between the words
regionally and significant). EPA is proposing to approve the changes to
rule .2002 because these changes, including the deletion of the
definition of consultation,\12\ do not alter transportation conformity
requirements for any applicable area in North Carolina nor do these
changes conflict with the federal requirements for transportation
conformity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ EPA notes that consultation process requirement to comply
with 40 CFR 93.105 were approved into the SIP within memoranda of
agreements addressing transportation conformity. See 67 FR 78986
(December 27, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section .2003 Transportation Conformity Determination is amended to
update references to federal transportation conformity requirements
from 40 CFR 93.109 through 93.119 as opposed to referencing the federal
transportation conformity requirements from 40 CFR 93.109 through
93.118; \13\ to clarify that written commitments to implement control
measures must be obtained if a control measure is not included in
either the transportation plan or the transportation improvement
program; and to make non-substantive

wording, punctuation and formatting changes. EPA is proposing to
approve the changes to rule .2003 because these changes do not alter
transportation conformity requirements for any applicable area in North
Carolina and these changes are consistent with the federal
transportation conformity requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ As 40 CFR 93.119 contains provisions for areas without a
motor vehicle emissions budget approved in the SIP, this provision
is not required to be in the SIP and would be applicable to such
areas absent its inclusion into the SIP. See 77 FR 14979 (March 14,
2012). However, North Carolina has chosen to submit this provision
for inclusion into the SIP, and as inclusion of this provision is
not inconsistent with federal transportation conformity requirements
or the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve this provision into North
Carolina's federally approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement is amended to provide a more
general reference to rule .2001 instead of referencing specific
subsections in rule .2001, and to make non-substantive wording,
punctuation and formatting changes. EPA is proposing to approve the
changes to rule .2005 because these changes do not alter transportation
conformity requirements for any applicable area in North Carolina and
these changes are consistent with the federal transportation conformity
requirements.
    In summary, EPA views the amendments described above as consistent
with the federal transportation conformity requirements and the Clean
Air Act, and is proposing to approve these rules, as amended, into the
North Carolina SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the following air quality rules in 15A NCAC subchapter 2D.:
Section .2001 Purpose, Scope and Applicability, Section .2002
Definitions, Section .2003 Transportation Conformity Determination, and
Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement, state-effective January 1, 2018.
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office
(please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information
Contact'' section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Proposed Action

    For the reasons explained above, EPA is proposing to approve North
Carolina's March 21, 2018, SIP revision, which amends and readopts
rules 15A NCAC subchapter 2D.: .2001, .2002, .2003, and .2005, for
inclusion into North Carolina's SIP.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, if
they meet the criteria of the CAA. These actions merely propose to
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these proposed actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: May 28, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-14143 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 6305]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02834]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fiftieth RTCA SC-206 Aeronautical Information and Meteorological
Data Link Services (AIS) Plenary

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

ACTION: Fiftieth RTCA SC-206 Aeronautical Information and
Meteorological Data Link Services (AIS) Plenary.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of Fiftieth RTCA SC-206 Aeronautical Information and
Meteorological Data Link Services (AIS) Plenary.

DATES: The meeting will be held March 15, 2018 8:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at: Harris Corporation--Technology
Center, 1395 Troutman Blvd NE, Palm Bay, FL 32905. Pre-registration is
required by March 2nd.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karan Hofmann at [email protected] or
202-330-0680, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW, Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at (202)
833-9434, or website at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Fiftieth RTCA SC-206 Aeronautical
Information and Meteorological Data Link Services (AIS) Plenary. The
agenda will include the following:

1. Opening Remarks: DFO, RTCA, and Chairman
2. Attendees' Introductions
3. Review and Approval of Meeting Agenda
4. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes (Herndon, VA)
5. Sub-Groups Reports
    A. SG1: CSC JC and Other SC Coordination (ISRAS)
    B. SG5: FIS-B MOPS
6. Decision on TOR Changes/Rejoining WG-76
7. Future Meetings Plans and Dates
8. Industry Coordination
    A. Horizon 2020--Honeywell
9. Action Item Review
10. Other Business
11. Adjourn

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 7, 2018.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17,
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-02834 Filed 2-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on March 16, 2005

July 21, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-135275-20412

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________

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

Application  of NORTH AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. (NORTH AMERICAN) filed
62/15/05 for:

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

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail from
the United States, via intermediate points to points in Trinidad and
Tobago and beyond.

Applicant rep:   David M. Kirstein<PHONE_NUMBER>   DOT Analyst:
Linda L. LundellThuy H. Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>5423

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

XX  Granted route integration authority sua sponte (subject to
conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   July 21, 2004  March 16,
2005, through July 21, 2006   March 16, 2007.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago.

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

XX  Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Conditions: The authority granted to serve intermediate and beyond
points is limited to countries with which the United States has signed
open-skies agreements and/or countries for which North American holds
authority to serve under certificates or exemptions issued by the
Department, and for which it holds route integration authority by virtue
of either the present action or other action of the Department.

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

________________________________________________________________________
____________________

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

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

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

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at: http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.aspU.S. Carrier
Exemption Conditions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

05/2004

 North American proposes to operate this service on a year-round basis,
beginning on or about June 1, 2005.  North American plans to initiate
service between New York, John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
and Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago (POS).


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30018-30020]
[FR Doc No: E9-14815]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-24171; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-08-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company CF6-50C Series
Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) for General Electric Company (GE) CF6-50C series turbofan engines.
That AD currently requires reworking certain forward fan stator cases
and installing a fan module secondary containment shield. This proposed
AD would require the same actions but would eliminate a certain service
bulletin from the compliance method. This proposed AD results from a
review that shows that only one of the service bulletins referenced in
the original AD is applicable as a compliance method. We are proposing
this AD revision to prevent uncontained fan blade failures, which can
result in separation of

airplane hydraulic lines, damage to critical airplane systems, and
possible loss of airplane control.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by August 24,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Rosa, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2006-24171;
Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-08-AD'' in the subject line of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search
function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any
of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who
sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).

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
the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Discussion

    On May 22, 2007, we issued AD 2007-11-18, Amendment 39-15075 (72 FR
30249, May 31, 2007). That AD requires reworking certain forward fan
stator cases and installing a fan module secondary containment shield.
That AD resulted from reports of uncontained fan blade failures. That
condition, if not corrected, could result in separation of airplane
hydraulic lines, damage to critical airplane systems, and possible loss
of airplane control due to uncontained fan blade failures.

Actions Since AD 2007-11-18 Was Issued

    Since AD 2007-11-18 was issued, we determined that we don't need GE
Service Bulletin No. CF6-50 S/B 72-0986, Revision 2, dated March 21,
2007, applicable to DC-10 series aircraft, in order to satisfy our
corrective action requirements. Accordingly, this proposed AD deletes
this SB as a required corrective action.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD
revision, which would require reworking certain forward fan stator
cases and installing a fan module secondary containment shield on
Airbus A300 series airplanes, and would eliminate GE Service Bulletin
No. CF6-50 S/B 72-0986, Revision 2, dated March 21, 2007. The proposed
AD would require that you do the rework and installations using GE
Service Bulletin No. CF6-50 S/B 72-0985, Revision 2, dated March 21,
2007 only.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD would affect 40 CF6-50C series turbofan
engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 2.5 work hours per engine to perform the actions,
and that the average labor rate is $80 per work hour. Required parts
would cost about $9,451 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate
the total cost of the AD to U.S. operators to be $386,040.

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 have 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 that the proposed AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD. You may get a copy of this summary at the
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

    Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the
Federal Aviation Administration 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 removing Amendment 39-15075 (72 FR
30249, May 31, 2007), and by adding a new airworthiness directive, to
read as follows:

General Electric Company: Docket No. FAA-2006-24171; Directorate
Identifier 2006-NE-08-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by August 24,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD revises AD 2007-11-18, Amendment 39-15075.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to General Electric Company (GE) CF6-50C,
CF6-50C1, CF6-50C2, and CF6-50C2R turbofan engines, with a forward
fan stator case, part number (P/N) 9064M53G04, G05, G06, G07, G08,
G09, G10, G12, or G13, or P/N 9173M37G01, G02, G03, G04, G05, or G06
installed. These engines are installed on, but not limited to,
Airbus A300, McDonnell Douglas DC-10 series, and DC-10-30F (KC-10A,
KDC-10) airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD revision results from a review that shows that only
one of the service bulletins referenced in the original AD is
applicable as a compliance method. We are issuing this AD to prevent
uncontained fan blade failures, which can result in separation of
airplane hydraulic lines, damage to critical airplane systems, and
possible loss of airplane control.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.
    (f) At the next engine shop visit after the effective date of
this AD, but no later than June 30, 2010, rework the forward fan
stator case and install the fan module secondary containment shield.
    (1) For engines on Airbus 300 series airplanes, use paragraph 3,
Accomplishment Instructions, of GE Service Bulletin (SB) No. CF6-50
S/B 72-0985, Revision 2, dated March 21, 2007, to do the rework and
installation.
    (2) Deleted.
    (g) The rework and installation specified in paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD can also be done on-wing.

Previous Credit

    (h) Previous credit is allowed for fan stator cases reworked and
containment shields installed using GE SB No. CF6-50 S/B 72-0985,
dated December 2, 1991 or Revision 1, dated September 15, 1998
before the effective date of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (i) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (j) European Aviation Safety Agency airworthiness directive
2004-0007, dated December 15, 2004, also addresses the subject of
this AD.
    (k) Contact James Rosa, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information
about this AD.
    (l) Contact General Electric Company via Lockheed Martin
Technology Services, 10525 Chester Road, Suite C, Cincinnati, Ohio
45215, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for a copy of
the service information referenced in this AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on June 17, 2009.
Carlos Pestana,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-14815 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


I , ' 1 CL UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105 April 2,2003 MEMORANDUM From: Lily Wong Rulemaking Office, Air Division To: Docket OAR 2002 0076 The WESTAR Model RuleMOU Workgroup was tasked by the Western Regional Air Partnership to complete the work on the draft model rule and MOU. In the course of conference calls in July and August of 2002, the Workgroup raised several issues relating to the milestones.

There is a timing issue. The states and tribes that intend to submit section 309 regional haze implementation plans by December 2003 will begin their process to adopt implementation plans in the spring and summer of 2003. At that time, it will not be clear which states and tribes have definitively decided to opt into the 309 program. Also, tribes are not subject to the December 2003 deadline and may opt in at any time. Because the milestones are based on states and tribes that have opted into the 309 program ( or conversely, the emissions fiom a given state or tribe that has not opted into the 309 program will be deducted from the regional milestones), it is unclear what the milestones will be when the states and tribes are developing their implementation plan. Consequently, the Workgroup believed that it would be best to include all necessary information and formulas to calculate the milestone, but not specify the milestone. The actual calculation of the milestone would occur on an annual basis once it is clear which states and tribes have opted into the 309 program.

The states and tribes opting into 309 are adopting implementation plans which govern activities within their jurisdiction. The program only becomes a federally enforceable regional program when EPA approves each state and tribal implementation plan. The program includes an annual process where states and tribes are required to make a determination of the milestone for a given year, and compare regional emissions against that milestone to determine if regional emissions have exceeded the milestone. If regional emissions have exceeded the milestone, the states and tribes are required to implement the trading program. The Workgroup believed that the determination of the milestone should be based on the number of states and tribes that have approved implementation plans by a specified date. For example, the 2003 milestone would be the 9 state regional milestone, minus all the emissions ( from the state and tribal opt out tables) from states and tribes which do not have approved 309 programs as of December 3 1,2004. While the states and tribes may also compare ( for informational purposes) the regional emissions to a milestone based on states and tribes that have submitted but do not have approved 309 implementation plans, such a comparison would be an academic exercise and could not be used to determine whether the backstop trading program has been triggered as required by the approved 309 implementation plans.

2


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2309-2313]
[FR Doc No: 2011-643]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 575

[Docket No. NHTSA 2011-0005]
RIN 2127-AK06

Consumer Information Regulations; Fees for Use of Traction Skid
Pads

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

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This NPRM proposes to amend NHTSA's consumer information
regulations on uniform tire quality grading standards by updating the
fees currently charged for use of the traction skid pads at NHTSA's San
Angelo Test Facility, formerly called the Uniform Tire Quality Grading
Test Facility, in San Angelo, Texas and by eliminating fees for course
monitoring tires, which are no longer supplied by NHTSA. This NPRM
updates the fees in accordance with Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-25, which governs fees assessed for Government services and
use of Government goods or resources.

DATES: Comments to this proposal must be received on or before March
14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket number in
the heading of this document, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.

     Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number of this document.
    You may call the Docket Management Facility at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program issues: Mr. George
Gillespie, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal issues: Ms. Carrie Gage, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 203 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
1966 directs the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe standards
establishing ``a uniform quality grading system for motor vehicle
tires.'' 49 U.S.C. 30123. Those standards are found at 49 CFR 575.104.
To aid consumers in making an informed choice in the purchase of
passenger car tires, the standards require motor vehicle and tire
manufacturers and tire brand owners to label such tires with
information indicating their relative performance in the areas of
treadwear, traction and temperature resistance. See 49 CFR 575.104(a).
    The Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS), 49 CFR 575.104,
state that tire traction is ``evaluated on skid pads that are
established, and whose severity is monitored, by the NHTSA both for its
compliance testing and for that of regulated persons.'' 49 CFR
575.104(f)(1). As further described in the standards, the test pads are
paved with asphalt and concrete surfaces that have specified locked
wheel traction coefficients when evaluated in a manner prescribed in
the standards. The traction skid pads are located at NHTSA's San Angelo
Test Facility. 49 CFR 575.104, App. B. In addition to this government
test facility, traction skid pads have been constructed at several
commercial facilities.
    The current fees charged for use of the traction skid pads at the
San Angelo Test Facility, as well as fees charged for course monitoring
tires, were established by final rule published in the Federal Register
on August 2, 1995. See 60 FR 39269 (Aug. 2, 1995).\1\ Pursuant to
Appendix D to 49 CFR 575.104, the fees charged to manufacturers for use
of the Government traction skid pads continue in effect until adjusted
by the Administrator of NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The August 2, 1995 final rule responded to a Department of
Transportation Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit of NHTSA's
facility in San Angelo in which the OIG concluded that NHTSA was not
charging a user fee for the use of the traction skid pads at the
facility and was not recovering the full cost of the course
monitoring tires that it sold at San Angelo, contrary to OMB
Circular A-25. See 60 FR 39269.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposal

    This NPRM proposes to update, in accordance with Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25, the fee charged to
manufacturers for use of the agency's traction skid pads at the San
Angelo Test Facility. It also proposes to remove provisions concerning
the fees charged for course monitoring tires, as NHTSA no longer
supplies these tires for purchase by manufacturers. Based on a current
assessment using a ``market price'' analysis as outlined below, NHTSA
proposes to update the fees for use of the facility from $34.00 an
hour, established in 1995, to $125 an hour. As discussed below, NHTSA
believes that this proposed fee reflects the current market price for
use of traction skid pads.
    OMB Circular A-25 establishes Federal policy regarding fees
assessed for Government services and for sale or use of Government
goods or resources. The Circular expresses the general policy that
``[a] user charge * * * will be assessed against each identifiable
recipient for special benefits derived from Federal activities beyond
those received by the general public.'' According to the Circular, a
``special benefit'' accrues and a user charge is assessed when a
Government service ``is performed at the request of or for the
convenience of the recipient, and is beyond the services regularly
received by other members of the same industry or group or by the
general public.'' Manufacturer use of NHTSA's testing facility is a
special benefit because use of the facility is beyond the services
regularly received by the industry or the general public.\2\
Accordingly, NHTSA assesses a user charge for the use of the traction
track.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ While there is a public benefit in making available a
standardized tire grading facility for manufacturer use, the public
benefits are incidental to the special benefits derived by the
manufacturers. According to Circular A-25, when the public obtains a
benefit as a necessary consequence of an agency's provision of
special benefits to an identifiable recipient, an agency should seek
to recover the applicable fee from the identifiable recipient.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of assessing user charges, the Circular requires
that, when the Government is acting in its capacity as sovereign, user
charges be sufficient to recover the full cost to the Government of
providing the good or service. When the Government is not acting as
sovereign, however, user charges are to be based on market prices. The
Government acts in its capacity as sovereign when it uses powers over
which it has a monopoly. See e.g., U.S. v. Reyes, 87 F.3d 676, 681 (5th
Cir. 1996). The Government may act in a sovereign capacity, for
example, when it is the only source of a good or service, such as where
the Government issues a license. See National Park Service--Special
Park Use Fees, B-307319, *6 (Aug. 23, 2007).
    The agency is not acting in its capacity as sovereign in making the
San Angelo Test Facility available for traction testing by
manufacturers. That facility serves primarily for NHTSA's own
compliance testing of manufacturers' tires. As we recently stated with
regard to the UTQGS regulations, manufacturers are not restricted to
the use of the traction skid pads at the government facility in San
Angelo. Rather, manufacturers may test their tires wherever they
choose. See 75 FR 15894, 15913 (March 30, 2010).\3\

Because NHTSA's own compliance tests are conducted at the San Angelo
Test Facility, tire manufacturers often choose to do so as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ It is the responsibility of each tire manufacturer to
certify that its tires comply with applicable Federal safety
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Fee Update Based on Market Price

    Pursuant to Circular A-25, ```Market price' means the price for a
good, resource, or service that is based on competition in open
markets, and creates neither a shortage nor a surplus of the good,
resource, or service.'' Where there is substantial competitive demand
for a good, resource, or service, the market price is determined by
commercial practice, for example, by competitive bidding, or by
reference to the prevailing price of the same or similar good,
resources, or services, adjusted to reflect demand, level of service
and quality of the good or service.
    To determine the appropriate market price for use of the San Angelo
Test Facility, NHTSA surveyed several commercial facilities with
traction skid pads available for public use. Prices for the hourly use
of traction skid pads ranged from approximately $115 per hour to
approximately $200 per hour. From its own experience, NHTSA believes
that discounted rates may be available based on volume use or advance
planning. Accordingly, NHTSA believes it is appropriate to take the
availability of discounts into account in arriving at a determination
of market rate. Taking a conservative approach, we propose to set the
rate for use of the traction skid pads at the lower end of this range--
$125 per hour. NHTSA welcomes comments regarding whether our proposed
rate for hourly use of the traction skid pads at the San Angelo Test
Facility accurately reflects the market price for such services.

IV. Public Participation

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this notice of
proposed rulemaking. The procedure for submitting comments is noted
below.

How do I prepare and submit written comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number at the beginning of this NPRM in your comments. Your primary
comments cannot exceed 15 pages. See 49 CFR 553.21. We established this
limit to encourage you to write your primary comments in a concise
fashion. However, you may attach additional documents to your primary
comments. There is no limit to the length of the attachments.
    Please submit your comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments to
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 am and 5 pm Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF
(Adobe) file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using
Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency
to search and copy certain portions of your submissions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of
converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or
electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in
order for substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it
must meet the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and
DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to
consult the guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may
be accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you submit your comments by mail and wish Docket Management to
notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed,
stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon
receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by
mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. When you send a comment
containing information claimed to be confidential business information,
you should include a cover letter setting forth the information
specified in our confidential business information regulation. See 49
CFR 512.
    In addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted
the claimed confidential business information, to the Docket by one of
the methods set forth above.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments received before the close of business
on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent
possible, we will also consider comments received after that date.
Therefore, if interested persons believe that any new information the
agency places in the docket affects their comments, they may submit
comments after the closing date concerning how the agency should
consider that information for the final rule.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the materials placed in the docket for this document
(e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other
interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also
read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management
Facility is open between 9 am and 5 pm Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR
51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof;
or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities or the principles set forth in the
Executive Order.
    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking is not significant as it does
not implicate any of the above-enumerated concerns. Accordingly, the
Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this rulemaking
document under Executive Order 12886. Further, NHTSA has determined
that the rulemaking is not significant under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.
    Based on the type of fees and the anticipated use of the test
track, NHTSA believes that the costs of the final rule would be minimal
and would not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation. The
proposed rule would increase fees charged to private manufacturers for
use of a government facility to prevailing market rates. Manufacturers
have a choice as to whether to use this government facility or a
private commercial facility. As a result, this action does not involve
any substantial public interest or controversy. Furthermore, NHTSA
anticipates that any impact on the sale price of tires would be
minimal, because an increase in testing fees would likely be
distributed across a manufacturer's sales volume. There would be no
substantial effect upon State and local governments. There would be no
substantial impact upon a major transportation safety program.

B. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has evaluated this proposed action for purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act and has determined that it would not
have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this proposed rulemaking under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996).
NHTSA believes that the proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The following is NHTSA's statement providing the factual basis for
the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). Tire manufacturers are not small
entities. The proposed amendments would affect businesses that conduct
contract traction testing, some of which are small businesses within
the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act; however, the agency does
not believe that this proposed rule would result in a significant
economic impact on these entities. Under the proposed standards, the
fees paid for use of the government facility would be essentially
equivalent to those paid to a commercial testing facility--the market
rate. The agency believes that small governmental jurisdictions would
be only minimally affected by the proposed rule since they are
generally not large scale purchasers of vehicles tires. Furthermore,
even in the case of substantial purchases, as noted above, costs passed
on to consumers are expected to be minimal since testing fees would
likely be distributed across a manufacturer's sales volume.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 on ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10,
1999), requires NHTSA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have Federalism implications.''
Executive Order 13132 defines the term ``policies that have federalism
implications'' to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, NHTSA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or NHTSA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
    The proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government as specified in Executive Order 13132.
Accordingly, Section 6 of the Executive Order does not apply to this
rulemaking action.

E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988 ``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR
4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), NHTSA has considered whether this rulemaking would
have any retroactive effect. The proposed rule would not have any
retroactive effect.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
Public Law 104-4, requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with
the base year of 2005). Adjusting this amount by the implicit gross
domestic product price deflator for 2009 results in $135 million
(109.770/81.536 = 1.35).
    This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure by State,
local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, of more than $135
million annually, and will not result in an expenditure of that
magnitude by private entities. Because a final rule based on this
proposal would not require expenditures exceeding $135 million
annually, this action is not subject to the requirements of Sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA), a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid
OMB control number. The proposed rule does not require the collection
of information by a Federal agency. Accordingly, the PRA is not
applicable to this action.

H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

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

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?

     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in your comments on this proposal.

J. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an organization, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 575

    Consumer protection, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
Part 575 as follows:

PART 575--CONSUMER INFORMATION

    1. The authority citation for part 575 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32302, 32304A, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30123,
30166, and 30168, Pub. L. 104-414, 114 Stat. 1800, Pub. L. 109-59,
119 Stat. 1144, Pub. L. 110-140, 121 Stat. 1492, 15 U.S.C. 1232(g);
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Revise Appendix D to Sec.  575.104 to read as follows:

Sec.  575.104  Uniform tire quality grading standards.

* * * * *

Appendix D--User Fees

    1. Use of Government Traction Skid Pads: A fee of $125 will be
assessed for each hour, or fraction thereof, that the traction skid
pads at Goodfellow Air Force Base, San Angelo, Texas are used. This
fee is based upon the market price of the use of the traction skid
pads.
    2. Fee payments shall be by check, draft, money order, or
Electronic Funds Transfer System made payable to the Treasurer of
the United States.
    3. The fee set forth in this Appendix continues in effect until
adjusted by the Administrator of NHTSA. The Administrator reviews
the fee set forth in this Appendix and, if appropriate, adjusts it
by rule at least every 2 years.

    Issued on: January 10, 2011.
Claude Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-643 Filed 1-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P