[Federal Register: July 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 138)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 40958-40960]
[DOCID:fr17jy08-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0232; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-309-AD;
Amendment 39-15612; AD 2008-14-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200 and A340-300
Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, multiple damage were
found in the upper side shell structure at skin and frame (FR) 84 &
85 interface, from stringer 6 to 15 LH/RH. This damage occurred
between 58,341 and 72,891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design (e.g.
skin thickness) for A330-200 and A340-300 aircraft series, the
damage assessment concluded on [a] potential impact on these
aircraft series.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is loss of integrity of the upper shell structure
of the fuselage. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 21, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 21,
2008.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on March 3, 2008 (73 FR
11364). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, multiple damage were
found in the upper side shell structure at skin and frame (FR) 84 &
85 interface, from stringer 6 to 15 LH/RH. This damage occurred
between 58,341 and 72,891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design (e.g.
skin thickness) for A330-200 and A340-300 aircraft series, the
damage assessment concluded on [a] potential impact on these
aircraft series.
    In order to allow early detection of cracks which could avoid
possible crack propagation and consequently to maintain the
structural integrity of the upper side shell structure between FR84
and FR87, this Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates an inspection
program of this area [for cracking] using a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) method and a modification to improve the upper shell
structure.
    This Revision 1 is issued to clarify that this AD is not
applicable to aircraft A340-300 series on which both AIRBUS
modifications 44205 and 45012 have been embodied in production.

The unsafe condition is loss of integrity of the upper shell structure
of the fuselage between FR84 and FR87. Corrective actions include
contacting Airbus and repairing any crack. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Remove Reference to Modification

    Air Transport Association (ATA) on behalf of its member Northwest
Airlines (NWA), requests that we remove the reference to Airbus
Modification (Mod.) 44205 from paragraph (c), ``Applicability,'' of the
NPRM. The commenters explain that Mod. 44205 defines common structure
for Section 19. Mod. 45012, which is in paragraph (f)(1) of the NPRM,
modifies the Section 19 upper side shell on A330-200 series airplanes.
    We disagree. Cracks can develop on this area of Section 19 that
affect basic airplanes fitted with the same features (i.e., post-Mod.
44205). For Model A340-300 series airplanes, Mod. 45012 addresses the
unsafe condition. Therefore, only Model A340-300 series airplanes on
which both Mod. 44205 and 45012 have been done in production are
exempt. Analysis further to these findings established that cracking
would also affect airplanes post-Mod. 45012 on Model A330-200 series
airplanes. The mandated action separates pre- or post-Mod. 45012, as
specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD. We have made no
change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Exclude Certain Airplanes

    The same commenters request that we exclude from paragraph (f)(1)
and Table 1 of the NPRM airplanes that have Mod. 52974 or 53223
embodied. The commenters explain that paragraph (c) excludes these
airplanes, but paragraph (f)(1) and Table 1 do not exclude them.
Without the exclusion, four more NWA airplanes are affected by the AD.
    We disagree. Paragraph (f)(1), which includes Table 1, refers to
paragraph (c) where the two modifications are listed as exclusions.
There is no need to exclude the airplanes again in paragraph (f)(1) or
Table 1 of the AD. We have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Move ``Before Further Flight'' Requirement

    The same commenters request that we move the requirement to ``Do
all applicable corrective actions before further flight'' from
paragraph (f)(1) of the NPRM to the ``Threshold'' column of Table 1 of
the NPRM. The commenters explain that moving this statement would make
it clear that corrective action is required at the time of the mandated
inspection thresholds and not before.
    We disagree. Paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD, which includes Table
1, gives thresholds for doing the HFEC inspection. Paragraph (f)(1)(ii)
of this AD also gives a possible threshold for the HFEC inspection. The
requirement is to do the applicable corrective actions before further
flight. We have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 7 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 601 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average
labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $52,160
per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on the
U.S. operators to be $701,680, or $100,240 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2008-14-17 Airbus: Amendment 39-15612. Docket No. FAA-2008-0232;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-309-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August
21, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-200 and A340-300 series
airplanes, certificated in any category, all certified models; all
serial numbers on which Airbus Modification 44205 has been embodied
in production, except those on which Airbus Modification 52974 or
53223 has been embodied in production. This AD is not applicable to
Model A340-300 series airplanes on which both Modifications 44205
and 45012 have been embodied in production.

Subject

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

Reason

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

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, multiple damage were
found in the upper side shell structure at skin and frame (FR) 84 &
85 interface, from stringer 6 to 15 LH/RH. This damage occurred
between 58,341 and 72,891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design (e.g.
skin thickness) for A330-200 and A340-300 aircraft series, the
damage assessment concluded on [a] potential impact on these
aircraft series.
    In order to allow early detection of cracks which could avoid
possible crack propagation and consequently to maintain the
structural integrity of the upper side shell structure between FR84
and FR87, this Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates an inspection
program of this area [for cracking] using a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) method and a modification to improve the upper shell
structure.
    This Revision 1 is issued to clarify that this AD is not
applicable to aircraft A340-300 series on which both AIRBUS
modifications 44205 and 45012 have been embodied in production.

The unsafe condition is loss of integrity of the upper shell
structure of the fuselage between FR84 and FR87. Corrective actions
include contacting Airbus and repairing any crack.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For Airbus Model A330-200 series airplanes, as identified in
paragraph (c) of this AD, on which Modification 45012 has been
embodied in production: At the later of the compliance times
specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, do the
HFEC inspection for cracking, and corrective actions as applicable;
and modify the upper shell structure of the fuselage; in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-53-3152, dated April 10, 2007. Do all applicable corrective
actions before further flight.
    (i) Prior to the compliance time shown in Table 1 of this AD
after the first flight of the airplane, depending on airplane
configuration.

     Table 1.--Compliance Times for Model A330 Series Airplanes With
                       Modification 45012 Embodied
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Airplane configuration                     Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-modification 48827 (WV20 to WV27)..  25,400 total flight cycles.
Post-modification 48827 (WV50 to WV56).  17,100 total flight cycles or
                                          94,700 total flight hours,
                                          whichever occurs first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For Airbus Model A330-200 and A340-300 series airplanes as
identified in paragraph (c) of this AD, on which Modification 45012
has not been embodied in production: At the later of the compliance
times specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) and (f)(2)(ii) of this AD,
modify the upper shell structure of the fuselage in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-
3157 or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4163, both dated July 5,
2006, as applicable.
    (i) Prior to the compliance time shown in Table 2 of this AD
after the first flight of the airplane.

    Table 2.--Compliance Times for Model A330-200 and A340-300 Series
              Airplanes Without Modification 45012 Embodied
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Airplane  series                        Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A330-200.........................  6,600 total flight cycles.
A340-300.........................  14,000 total flight cycles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn:
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2007-0269R1, dated October 15, 2007; Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-53-3152, dated April 10, 2007; Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-53-3157, dated July 5, 2006; and Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-53-4163, dated July 5, 2006; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the applicable service information specified in
Table 3 of this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-
locations.html.

              Table 3.--Material Incorporated by Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Service Bulletin                           Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3152  April 10, 2007.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3157  July 5, 2006.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4163  July 5, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 27, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-15708 Filed 7-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76422-76424]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31389]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0858]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Experimental Study on Comparing Data Obtained From
Landline Telephone and Cell Phone Surveys

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on a study entitled ``Experimental Study on
Comparing Data Obtained From Landline Telephone and Cell Phone
Surveys.''

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by February 6, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, II, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information before
submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this
requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Experimental Study on Comparing Data Obtained From Landline Telephone
and Cell Phone Surveys--(OMB Control Number 0910-NEW)

I. Background

    Since the early 1980s, the Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition at FDA has been commissioning several waves of two national
consumer surveys, the Food Safety Survey (FSS) and the Health and Diet
Survey (HDS), to gather data on consumer knowledge, perceptions, and
behaviors regarding food safety and nutrition. The purposes of the
surveys are three-fold: (1) To generate nationally representative
estimates of knowledge, perception, and practice of interest at a given
point in time; (2) to track trends of the estimates over time; and (3)
to understand the relationships among knowledge, perceptions, and
practices regarding food safety and nutrition and how these relate to
demographic characteristics.
    Traditionally, all waves of the surveys have been administered via
landline telephones and have used the random digit dialing (RDD)
technique to recruit national samples of adults (18 years old or above)
from households with landline telephone numbers. A noticeable
phenomenon that has appeared in our recent surveys is a precipitous
decline of younger respondents in completed interviews. For example,
the proportion of respondents in the 18 to 29 age group for the FSS has
dropped from 17 percent in 2001 to 11 percent in 2006 to only 4 percent
in 2010; the corresponding proportion for the HDS has gone from 14
percent in 2002, to 15 percent in 2004, to only 6 percent in 2008.
    One possible reason for the decline is the rapid adoption of cell
phones in recent years. During the second half of 2010, 28 percent of
American adults lived in households with only wireless service
(``wireless-only households'' or ``cell-phone only households''),
compared to 15 percent in the second half of 2007 and 5 percent in the
second half of 2004 (Ref. 1). During the second half of 2010, 17
percent of adults lived in households that received all or almost all
calls on cell phones despite having a landline phone (``wireless-mostly
households'' or ``cell-phone mostly households''), an increase of 3
percentage points from the first half of 2008 (Ref. 1). Thus, the
number of adults reachable by landline phone calls has decreased in
recent years. The rate of cell phone adoption, however, has been uneven
among adults with different demographic characteristics. In 2010,
adults living in wireless-only households were more likely to be 18 to
34 year olds, living in poorer households, without a college or higher
educational degree, or Hispanics or Latinos (Ref. 1). Meanwhile, adults
who live in landline households differ from those who live in wireless-
only households as well those in wireless-mostly households (Ref. 2),
and the demographic characteristics of adults living in wireless-mostly
households are much less diverse than that of adults living in
wireless-only households (Ref. 1).
    The under-representation of wireless-only or wireless-mostly
adults, especially those in younger age groups, in landline surveys can
affect national estimates of the prevalence of certain

consumer perceptions, knowledge or behaviors and understanding of the
relationships between certain survey responses and demographic
characteristics. For example, previous research found different
prevalence rates of drinking and smoking between respondents reached on
a landline call versus respondents from wireless-only households (Ref.
1). Wireless-mostly adults were less likely than landline adults to say
their health is fair or poor and were less likely to be a current
smoker than wireless-only adults (Ref. 2). Voigt et al. (Ref. 3)
reported that cell-phone users were less likely to have fathered or
given birth to a child than their landline telephone counterparts. The
differences observed in these studies are pertinent and potentially
problematic for the HDS and FSS because past surveys have shown that
age variations were associated with, among other things, consumers'
knowledge of dietary fats, and awareness and concern about pesticide
and antibiotic residues (Refs. 4 and 5).
    Thus, our recent surveys may have become vulnerable to a
noncoverage problem due to the fact that many eligible respondents are
not included in the survey samples because they do not own landline
phones or because they receive calls only or mostly on cell phones.
Adults living in wireless-only and wireless-mostly households are less
likely to appear in landline telephone samples and often possess
characteristics that differ from those of adults in landline
households. Thus, a telephone survey that still relies exclusively on
landline phone calls to interview respondents may not produce results
that are reliable and valid (Refs. 2 and 6), may not yield results that
are comparable to results from past landline surveys when this
noncoverage problem was absent, or both.
    One common approach to addressing potential impacts of cell phone
use on landline telephone survey results is to supplement a landline
telephone survey with a cell phone survey to achieve a wider coverage
of population in the sample of respondents. Existing evidence on the
usefulness of this approach varies between national estimates and
population subgroup estimates. Many studies conducted around the mid-
2000s (for example, Ref. 7), when the use of cell phones was not as
common as today, and a 2007 study (Ref. 2) suggested that general
population estimates of certain social and political attitudes, voting
behavior, and media use and attitudes did not always vary when a
landline survey was supplemented or was not supplemented with a cell-
phone only survey, especially when the response to a landline survey
was weighted to reflect population characteristics. On the other hand,
this research also suggested that among young adults and low-income
adults, estimates of certain health-related behaviors, such as smoking
and binge drinking, differ between those living in households with and
without landlines (Ref. 8). In addition, young adults who had a
landline phone were less likely to report drinking alcohol or to agree
that marijuana smoking is acceptable (Ref. 9). We are, however, not
aware of any research that has examined whether food safety or
nutrition related perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors differ when
landline telephone surveys miss respondents who are not reachable by
landline telephone calls.
    Therefore, we are concerned that the diminishing survey
participation among consumers who are not easily reached by landline
telephones may lead to unreliable or biased estimates of critical
information and the relationships among knowledge, perceptions, and
other food safety and nutrition related variables. These concerns
warrant a systematic examination of the impacts of cell phone use on
the quality of the FSS and HDS data.
    The objective of this data collection is to provide data for an
experimental study that compares demographic distributions in and
responses to selected FSS and HDS questions by samples of respondents
drawn from an overlapping dual frame (Ref. 6), i.e., two overlapping
sampling frames: (1) A list-assisted landline telephone frame and (2) a
cell phone frame. Using this approach, we will not screen out any
households or individuals because of their type(s) of telephone service
(landline or cell phone). The study plans to interview 2,000
respondents in English, half of them (1,000) using a 10-minute HDS
questionnaire and half of them (1,000) using a 10-minute FSS
questionnaire. Each respondent will be randomly assigned to one of the
questionnaires. The target distributions within each of the HDS and FSS
samples are: 700 respondents who are drawn from the landline frame and
complete the questionnaire on a landline telephone; 150 respondents who
are drawn from the cell phone frame and complete the questionnaire on a
cell phone, regardless of whether they are wireless-only or wireless-
mostly; and 150 respondents who are drawn from the cell phone frame,
complete the questionnaire on a cell phone, and do not have a landline
phone to receive personal calls.
    The HDS questionnaire will focus on knowledge of dietary fats, use
of food labels, awareness of diet-health relationships, and use and
understanding of dietary supplements. The FSS questionnaire will focus
on perceptions of general food safety risks, food handling practices,
perceived personal vulnerability to food safety risks, consumption of
risky foods, and awareness of mercury and fish. All questions have been
asked in previous surveys.
    The Agency will use the study to assess the impacts of cell phone
use on population estimates of nutrition and food safety related
perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. The assessment will help the
Agency determine whether and how future administrations of the FSS and
HDS should be adjusted to produce reliable, valid, and historically
comparable results in response to the growing prevalence of cell phone
use.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Number of
                  Activity                       Number of       responses per     Total annual        Average burden per response         Total hours
                                                respondents       respondent         responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pretest....................................                10                 1                10  .167                                                2
                                                                                (10 minutes).......................
Survey.....................................             2,000                 1             2,000  .167                                              334
                                                                                (10 minutes).......................
                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total..................................  ................  ................  ................  ...................................              336
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

II. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
(FDA has verified the Web site addresses, but FDA is not responsible
for any subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document
publishes in the Federal Register.)

1. Blumberg, S.J., and J.V. Luke, ``Wireless Substitution: Early
Release of Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey,
July-December 2010,'' (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm), National
Center for Health Statistics, June 2011.
2. Lee, S., J.M. Brick, E.R. Brown, et al., ``Growing Cell-Phone
Population and Noncoverage Bias in Traditional Random Digit Dialing
Telephone Health Surveys,'' Health Services Research, 45: 1121-1139,
2010.
3. Voigt, L.F., S.M. Schwartz, D.R. Doody, et al., ``Feasibility of
Including Cellular Telephone Numbers in Random Digit Dialing for
Epidemiologic Case-Control Studies,'' American Journal of
Epidemiology, 173: 118-126, 2011.
4. Yen, S.T., K.L. Jensen, and C.-T.J. Lin, ``Awareness and
Perceived Risk of Pesticide and Antibiotic Residues in Food:
Socioeconomic Variations Among U.S. Consumers,'' Food Protection
Trends, 26: 654-661, 2006.
5. Lin, C.-T.J. and S.T. Yen, ``Knowledge of Dietary Facts Among
U.S. Consumers,'' Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110:
613-618, 2010.
6. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), ``New
Considerations for Survey Researchers When Planning and Conducting
RDD Telephone Surveys in the United States With Respondents Reached
via Cell Phone Numbers,'' (http://www.aapor.org/Cell_Phone_Task_Force_Report.htm), 2010.
7. Keeter, S., ``The Impact of Cellular Phone Noncoverage Bias on
Polling in the 2004 Presidential Election,'' Public Opinion
Quarterly, 70: 88-98, 2006.
8. Blumberg, S.J. and J.V. Luke, ``Reevaluating the Need for Concern
Regarding Noncoverage Bias in Landline Surveys,'' American Journal
of Public Health, 99: 1806-1810, 2009.
9. Keeter, S., C. Kennedy, A. Clark, et al., ``What's Missing From
National Landline RDD Surveys? The Impact of the Growing Cell-Only
Population,'' Public Opinion Quarterly, 71: 772-792, 2007.

    Dated: December 2, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-31389 Filed 12-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


1740 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2004 / Notices F. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

Pursuant to section 3506( c)( 2)( A) of PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burdens of the proposed collections of information. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated or electronic collection technologies or other forms of information technology, e. g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

II. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Action Apply to?

EPA is seeking comments on the following ICR: Title: Reporting and Recordkeeping for Asbestos Abatement Worker Protection. ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1246.09, OMB Control No. 2070   0072. ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on July 31, 2004. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. Abstract: EPA's asbestos worker protection rule is designed to provide occupational exposure protection to state and local government employees who are engaged in asbestos abatement activities in states that do not have state plans approved by OSHA. The rule provides protection for public employees not covered by the OSHA standard from the adverse health effects associated with occupational exposure to asbestos. This rule requires state and local governments to monitor employee exposure to asbestos, take action to reduce exposure, monitor employee health, train employees about asbestos hazards, and provide employees with information about exposures to asbestos and the associated health effects. The rule also requires state and local governments to notify EPA before commencing any asbestos abatement project. State and local governments must maintain medical surveillance and monitoring records and training records on their employees, must establish a set of written procedures for respirator programs, and must maintain procedures and records of respirator fit tests. EPA will use the information to monitor compliance with the asbestos worker protection rule. Responses to the collection of information are mandatory ( see 40 CFR part 763, subpart G). Respondents may claim all or part of a notice confidential. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) section 14 and 40 CFR part 2.

III. What are EPA's Burden and Cost Estimates for this ICR?

Under PRA, `` burden'' means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. For this collection it includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized in this notice. The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.33 hours per response. The following is a summary of the estimates taken from the ICR: Respondents/ affected entities: 25,312. Estimated total number of potential respondents: 25,312. Frequency of response: On occasion; includes third party notification. Estimated average number of responses for each respondent: 50. Estimated total annual burden hours: 412,243 hours. Estimated total annual burden costs: $ 13,281,559. IV. Are There Changes in the Estimates from the Last Approval?

This request reflects a decrease of 24,046 hours ( from 436,289 hours to 412,243 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden from that currently in the OMB inventory. This decrease is due to a reduction in the number of supervisors at affected entities that need to read and interpret the regulation. In the previous ICR EPA anticipated that all supervisors undertook this activity. In the current ICR EPA expects that only new supervisors must do so. The change in burden represents an adjustment.

V. What is the Next Step in the Process for this ICR?

EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5( a)( 1)( iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 24, 2003. William H. Sanders III, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[ FR Doc. 04   562 Filed 1   9   04; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT   2003   0070; FRL   7339   5]

Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Disclosure Requirements; Request for Comment on Renewal of Information Collection Activities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.) EPA is seeking public comment and information on the following Information Collection Request ( ICR): Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Disclosure Requirements ( EPA ICR No. 1710.04, OMB Control No. 2070   0151). This ICR involves a VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 58 Jan 09, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 12JAN1. SGM 12JAN1 1741 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2004 / Notices collection activity that is currently approved and scheduled to expire on July 31, 2004. The information collected under this ICR helps EPA protect public health by assuring that sellers and lessors of residential housing units inform purchasers and renters of the presence of lead based paint in such residences. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection activity and its expected burden and costs. Before submitting this ICR to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval under the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the collection. DATES: Written comments, identified by the docket ID number OPPT   2003   0070, must be received on or before March 12, 2004. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Barbara Cunningham, Director, Environmental Assistance Division ( 7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 554   1404; e mail address: TSCAHotline epa. gov. For technical information contact: Cindy Wheeler, National Program Chemicals Division ( 7404T), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 566   0484; fax number: ( 202) 566   0473; e mail address: wheeler. cindy@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are engaged in selling, purchasing, or leasing certain residential dwellings built before 1978, or are a real estate agent representing such parties. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Lessors of real estate ( NAICS 5311), e. g., Lessors of residential buildings and dwellings.   Offices of real estate agents and brokers ( NAICS 5312), e. g., Real estate agents and brokers.   Private parties engaged in real estate sales or lease transactions ( no corresponding NAICS codes), e. g., Sellers and buyers of residential dwellings, landlords and tenants of residential dwellings. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPPT   2003   0070. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit the Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 58 Jan 09, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 12JAN1. SGM 12JAN1 1742 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2004 / Notices the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked `` late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit I. D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, select `` search,'' and then key in docket ID number OPPT   2003   0070. The system is an `` anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E mail. Comments may be sent by e mail to oppt. ncic@ epa. gov, Attention: Docket ID Number OPPT   2003   0070. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system is not an `` anonymous access'' system. If you send an e mail comment directly to the docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system automatically captures your email address. E mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I. C. 2. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: Document Control Office ( 7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: OPPT Document Control Office ( DCO) in EPA East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID Number OPPT   2003   0070. The DCO is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is ( 202) 564   8930.

D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency? Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e mail. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI ( if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider when I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

F. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

Pursuant to section 3506( c)( 2)( A) of PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burdens of the proposed collections of information. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated or electronic collection technologies or other forms of information technology, e. g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

II. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Action Apply to?

EPA is seeking comments on the following ICR: Title: Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Disclosure Requirements. ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1710.04, OMB Control No. 2070   0151. ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on July 31, 2004. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register,

VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 58 Jan 09, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 12JAN1. SGM 12JAN1 1743 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2004 / Notices are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. Abstract: Section 1018 of the Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 ( 42 U. S. C. 4852d) requires that sellers and lessors of most residential housing built before 1978 disclose known information on the presence of lead based paint and leadbased paint hazards and provide an EPA approved pamphlet to purchasers and renters before selling or leasing the housing. Sellers of pre 1978 housing are also required to provide prospective purchasers with 10 days to conduct an inspection or risk assessment for leadbased paint hazards before obligating purchasers under contracts to purchase the property. The rule does not apply to rental housing that has been found to be free of lead based paint, zero bedroom dwellings, housing for the elderly, housing for the handicapped, or shortterm leases. The affected parties and the information collection related requirements related to each are described below: 1. Sellers of pre 1978 residential housing. Sellers of pre 1978 housing must attach certain notification and disclosure language to their sales/ leasing contracts. The attachment lists the information disclosed and acknowledges compliance by the seller, purchaser, and any agents involved in the transaction. 2. Lessors of pre 1978 residential housing. Lessors of pre 1978 housing must attach notification and disclosure language to their leasing contracts. The attachment, which lists the information disclosed and acknowledges compliance with all elements of the rule, must be signed by the lessor, lessee, and any agents acting on their behalf. Agents and lessees must retain the information for 3 years from the completion of the transaction. 3. Agents acting on behalf of sellers or lessors. Section 1018 of the Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 specifically directs EPA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD) to require agents acting on behalf of sellers or lessors to ensure compliance with the disclosure regulations. Responses to the collection of information are mandatory ( see 40 CFR part 745, subpart F and 24 CFR part 35, subpart H). Respondents may claim all or part of a notice confidential. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) section 14 and 40 CFR part 2. III. What are EPA's Burden and Cost Estimates for this ICR?

Under PRA, `` burden'' means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. For this collection it includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized in this notice. The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.19 hours. The following is a summary of the estimates taken from the ICR: Respondents/ affected entities: 47,516,400. Estimated total number of potential respondents: Unknown. Frequency of response: On occasion; third party notification only. Estimated total/ average number of responses for each respondent: 1. Estimated total annual burden hours: 8,855,610 hours. Estimated total annual burden costs: $ 135,775,347.

IV. Are There Changes in the Estimates from the Last Approval?

This request reflects a net increase of 1,199,725 hours ( from 7,655,885 hours to 8,855,610 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden from that currently in the OMB inventory. This increase is due largely to an increase in projected real estate sales, presumably associated with historically low interest rates. The previous ICR analysis projected sales of target housing units at a rate of 3,429,447 per year. The current analysis projects sales of 4,324,000 units per year, or an increase of about 895,000 units per year. The increase in real estate sales is partially offset by a projected decrease in the number of rental transactions, down from 8,930,274 transactions to 8,252,000 transactions. The change in burden represents an adjustment. V. What is the Next Step in the Process for this ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5( a)( 1)( iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 24, 2003. William H. Sanders III, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[ FR Doc. 04   563 Filed 1   9   04; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7608   2]

Notice of Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) General Permit for the Eastern Portion of Outer Continental Shelf ( OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico ( GMG280000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of Proposed Reissuance of NPDES General Permit, Notice to States of Mississippi, Alabama and Florida for Consistency Review with approved Coastal Management Programs.

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator of EPA Region 4 ( the `` Region'') is today proposing to reissue the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) general permit for the Outer Continental Shelf ( OCS) of the Gulf of Mexico ( General Permit No. GMG28A000) for discharges in the Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category ( 40 Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) part 435, subpart A). DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received by March 12, 2004. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to comment upon or object to any aspects of this permit reissuance are invited to VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 58 Jan 09, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 12JAN1. SGM 12JAN1


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 23 (Thursday, February 4, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5902-5903]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02040]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-4532; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-10]

Amendment of Class E Airspace for the following New York Towns;
Ithaca, NY; Poughkeepsie, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E Airspace at Ithaca Tompkins
Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY; and Kingston VORTAC, Poughkeepsie, NY, by
eliminating the Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) part time status of the Class
E surface airspace designated as an extension at the Ithaca and
Poughkeepsie locations. This action also adds Dutchess County Airport
to the Kingston VORTAC designation, updates the geographic coordinates
of each navigation aid and Ithaca Tompkins Regional to coincide with
the FAA's aeronautical database, and recognizes the airport name for
Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport. This is an administrative change to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 31, 2016. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/airtraffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace at the New York airports listed in this
final rule.

History

    In a review of the airspace, the FAA found the airspace description
for Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY, formerly Tompkins
County Airport, and Kingston VORTAC, Poughkeepsie, NY, as published in
FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, does not
match the FAA's charting information. This administrative change
coincides with the FAA's aeronautical database for Class E Airspace
Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 6004 of
FAA Order 7400.9Z dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B,
C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by eliminating the NOTAM information that reads ``This Class E
airspace area is effective during the specific dates and

time established in advance by Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.'' from the regulatory text of the Class E airspace
designated as an extension to Class D at Ithaca Tompkins Regional
Airport, Ithaca, NY; and the Kingston VORTAC, Poughkeepsie, NY. Also,
as Dutchess County Airport, Poughkeepsie, NY, is supported by the
Kingston VORTAC, it is included in the VORTAC designation.
    Additionally, the geographic coordinates for the listed navaids and
Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport are updated to be in concert with the
FAA's aeronautical database. The FAA also recognizes the airport's name
change from Tompkins County Airport, Ithaca, NY, to Ithaca Tomkins
Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY.
    This is an administrative change amending the description for the
above New York airports, to be in concert with the FAAs aeronautical
database, and does not affect the boundaries, or operating requirements
of the airspace, therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C.
553(b) are unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120, E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015,
effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class D Surface Area.

* * * * *

AEA NY E4 Ithaca, NY [Amended]

Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY
    (Lat. 42[deg]29'29'' N., long. 76[deg]27'31'' W.)
Ithaca VOR/DME
    (Lat. 42[deg]29'43'' N., long. 76[deg]27'35'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4-mile
radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 5.7-mile radius of
the airport clockwise from the 329[deg] bearing to the 081[deg]
bearing from the airport, and that airspace from the 4-mile radius
of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 8.7-mile radius of the
airport extending clockwise from the 081[deg] bearing to the
137[deg] bearing from the airport, and that airspace from the 4-mile
radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 6.6-mile radius of
the airport extending clockwise from the 137[deg] bearing to the
170[deg] bearing from the airport, and that airspace from the 4-mile
radius to the 5.7-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport
extending clockwise from the 170[deg] bearing to the 196[deg]
bearing from the airport, and that airspace within 2.7 miles each
side of the Ithaca VOR/DME 305[deg] radial extending from the 4-mile
radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to 7.4 miles northwest of
the Ithaca VOR/DME.
* * * * *

AEA NY E4 Poughkeepsie, NY [Amended]

Dutchess County Airport, Poughkeepsie, NY
    (Lat. 41[deg]37'36'' N., long. 73[deg]53'03'' W.)
Kingston VORTAC
    (Lat. 41[deg]39'56'' N., long. 73[deg]49'20'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.1 miles
each side of the Kingston VORTAC 025[deg] radial extending from the
VORTAC to 8.3 miles northeast of the VORTAC and within 1.8 miles
each side of the Kingston VORTAC 231[deg] radial extending from the
4-mile radius to 9.2 miles southwest of the VORTAC and within 3.1
miles each side of the Kingston VORTAC 050[deg] radial extending
from the VORTAC to 9.2 miles northeast of the VORTAC.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on January 27, 2016.
Ryan W. Almasy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2016-02040 Filed 2-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37801-37803]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14866]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30846; Amdt. No. 3482]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective June 25, 2012. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of June 25, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability--All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available
online free of charge. Visit http://www.nfdc.faa.gov to register.
Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may
be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs
Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma
City, OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulators description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The applicable FAA
Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition
to their complex nature and the need for a special format make
publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical.
Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs,
Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on
charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. The advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on
FAA forms is unnecessary. This

amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of
SIAPs and the effective dates of the, associated Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure, and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The
circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums
and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30
days. For the remaining SIAPS and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPS and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedures before adopting these SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in
less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule '' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,1979) ;
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC on June 8, 2012.
John Duncan,
Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and/or Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0902 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

* * * Effective July 26, 2012

Sand Point, AK, Sand Point, RAYMD (RNAV) ONE Graphic DP
Sand Point, AK, Sand Point, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 14, Amdt 1
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 32, Amdt 9
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 2
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Dothan, AL, Dothan Rgnl, VOR OR TACAN-A, Amdt 13
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 14, Amdt 31
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 32, Amdt 7
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, NDB RWY 14, Amdt 3
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, RADAR-1, Amdt 5
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 2
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2
Mobile, AL, Mobile Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Paragould, AR, Kirk Field, NDB RWY 22, Amdt 1A, CANCELED
Douglas Bisbee, AZ, Bisbee Douglas Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig
Douglas Bisbee, AZ, Bisbee Douglas Intl, VOR RWY 17, Amdt 3
Douglas Bisbee, AZ, Bisbee Douglas Intl, VOR/DME RWY 17, Amdt 6
Fort Huachuca Sierra Vista, AZ, Sierra Vista Muni-Libby AAF, ILS OR LOC
RWY 26, Amdt 4
Fort Huachuca Sierra Vista, AZ, Sierra Vista Muni-Libby AAF, VOR RWY
26, Amdt 5
Willcox, AZ, Cochise County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 1
Willcox, AZ, Cochise County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1
Little River, CA, Little River, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1
Santa Maria, CA, Santa Maria Pub/Capt G Allan Hancock Fld, ILS OR LOC
RWY 12, Amdt 10
Van Nuys, CA, Van Nuys, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5
Washington, DC, Washington Dulles Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 1C, Orig-E
Washington, DC, Washington Dulles Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 2
Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Wauchula, FL, Wauchula Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1
Wauchula, FL, Wauchula Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Clinton, IA, Clinton Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1
Clinton, IA, Clinton Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1
Cairo, IL, Cairo Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Moline, IL, Quad City Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Pittsfield, IL, Pittsfield Penstone Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Orig
Washington, KS, Washington County Memorial, NDB-A, Amdt 1, CANCELED
Louisville, KY, Louisville Intl-Standiford Field, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 5
Paducah, KY, Barkley Rgnl, VOR/DME RWY 22, Amdt 6
Portland, ME, Portland Intl Jetport, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 6
Eldon, MO, Eldon Model Airpark, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig
Eldon, MO, Eldon Model Airpark, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig
Eldon, MO, Eldon Model Airpark, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Starkville, MS, George M Bryan, LOC/DME RWY 36, Amdt 1
Starkville, MS, George M Bryan, NDB-C, Admt 3, CANCELED

Starkville, MS, George M Bryan, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2
Starkville, MS, George M Bryan, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 3
Newark, NJ, Newark Liberty Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 29, Amdt 1
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 15
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 23, Amdt 30
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 32, Amdt 1
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 2
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14 Amdt 1
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 2
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2
Buffalo, NY, Buffalo Niagara Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 6
Cleveland, OH, Cleveland-Hopkins Intl, CONVERGING ILS RWY 24R, Amdt 1,
CANCELLED
Cleveland, OH, Cleveland-Hopkins Intl, CONVERGING ILS RWY 28, Orig-B,
CANCELED
Cleveland, OH, Cleveland-Hopkins Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 28, Amdt 24A
Wapakoneta, OH, Neil Armstrong, VOR-A, Amdt 8
Towanda, PA, Bradford County, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig
Towanda, PA, Bradford County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Myrtle Beach, SC, Myrtle Beach Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 18, Amdt 3
Myrtle Beach, SC, Myrtle Beach Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 36, Amdt 3
Myrtle Beach, SC, Myrtle Beach Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 3
Myrtle Beach, SC, Myrtle Beach Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 3
Myrtle Beach, SC, Myrtle Beach Intl, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 2
Winnsboro, SC, Fairfield County, NDB RWY 4, Amdt 4
Winnsboro, SC, Fairfield County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1
Winnsboro, SC, Fairfield County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1
Brenham, TX, Brenham Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 2
Brenham, TX, Brenham Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 2
Coleman, TX, Coleman Muni, GPS RWY 15, Orig-A, CANCELLED
Coleman, TX, Coleman Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Orig
Eagle Lake, TX, Eagle Lake, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
Eagle Lake, TX, Eagle Lake, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
La Grange, TX, Fayette Rgnl Air Center, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 2
La Grange, TX, Fayette Rgnl Air Center, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 2
LA Porte, TX, La Porte Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Amdt 2
Lubbock, TX, Lubbock Preston Smith Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 2
Lubbock, TX, Lubbock Preston Smith Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 1
Lubbock, TX, Lubbock Preston Smith Intl, VOR/DME OR TACAN RWY 26, Amdt
11
Marion/Wytheville, VA, Mountain Empire, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 2
Bellingham, WA, Bellingham Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16, ILS RWY 16 (SA CAT
I), Amdt 6
Bellingham, WA, Bellingham Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16, Amdt 2
Bellingham, WA, Bellingham Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34, Amdt 1
Bellingham, WA, Bellingham Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16, Orig
Bellingham, WA, Bellingham Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34, Orig
Chehalis, WA, Chehalis-Centralia, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 1
Chehalis, WA, Chehalis-Centralia, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
Eastsound, WA, Orcas Island, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Friday Harbor, WA, Friday Harbor, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 2
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, ZILLA THREE Graphic
DP
Prairie Du Chien, WI, Prairie Du Chien Muni, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Tomahawk, WI, Tomahawk Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 2A

[FR Doc. 2012-14866 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P