[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 193 (Friday, October 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 46820]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21642]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4329-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

New Hampshire; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of New Hampshire (FEMA-4329-DR), dated August 9 2017, and
related determinations.

DATES: The amendment was issued on September 21, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N. Russo,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Albert Lewis as Federal
Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-21642 Filed 10-5-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 111 (Tuesday, June 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35347-35348]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12399]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-456, OMB Control No. 3235-0515]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

Extension:

    Schedule TO

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget the request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Schedule TO (17 CFR 240.14d-100) must be filed by a reporting
company that makes a tender offer for its own securities. Also, persons
other than the reporting company making a tender offer for equity
securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C.
78l) (which offer, if consummated, would cause that person to own over
5% of that class of the securities) must file a Schedule TO. The
purpose of Schedule TO is to improve communications between public
companies and investors before companies file registration statements
involving tender offer statements. This information is made available
to the public. The information provided on Schedule TO is mandatory.
Schedule TO takes approximately 43.5 hours per response and is filed by
approximately 1,378 issuers annually. We estimate that 50% of the 43.5
hours per response (21.75 hours) is prepared by the issuer for an
annual reporting burden of 29,972 hours (21.75 hours per response x
1,378 responses).
    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 control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice
to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by
sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 3, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-12399 Filed 6-8-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

                 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
              OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

        EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Antimicrobials Division (AD)
Meeting with Sodium Hypochlorite Stakeholders
May 16, 2017
3:00 pm - 4:00 pm EST
                              Potomac Yard South
                                 Arlington, VA

Attendees:

External Stakeholders:					EPA:

Steve Via, American Water Works Association
Kevin Morley, American Water Works Association	Rose Kyprianou, Chief, RMB2, AD
						Wanda Henson, Environ. Protection Specialist, RMB2, AD
						Jose Gayoso, Senior Regulatory Advisor, RMB2, AD
						Sandra O'Neill, Chemical Review Manager, RMB2, AD
						Steve Weiss, Chief, RASSB, AD
     	                                                                         Jessica Bailey, Chemical Review Manager, RMB2, AD
					               Laura Parsons, Associate Chief, RASSB, AD
						Tim Leighton, Senior Human Health Scientist, RASSB, AD
						Diana Hsieh, Chemist, RASSB, AD
                              Tim Dole, Industrial Hygienist, RASSB, AD
						Jimmy Chen, Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water
 						Ryan Albert, Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water

Meeting Discussion:

The agenda topics discussed at the May 16, 2017 meeting are presented below.

 Next steps in the hypochlorite registration review process
 Discuss path forward to minimize perchlorate and chlorate
 Best management practices as label changes for registration review
 Residual chlorine at drinking water disinfection utilities

EPA is reviewing the sodium and calcium hypochlorite chemicals in the registration review program. EPA Antimicrobials Division staff and industry representatives met to discuss factors impacting formation of two potential hypochlorite degradates - chlorate and perchlorate  -  and the label changes that could be helpful in keeping their formation down. EPA-OPP will be signing the preliminary interim decision (PID) for the hypochlorites by June 30, 2017. EPA will continue to refine BMP's for perchlorate formation minimization for the PID and will reach out to AWWA again with any questions or big changes.


variants may be missed if only PCR is used, depending on
the primers chosen for amplification. Studies using direct
hybridization assays and longer probes should be capable
of detecting strains with less than 10 percent sequence
variation.

BROWN ET AL.
1k
TRANSFUSION
Volume 41, January 2001
www.transfusion.org
Simian systems such as the cynomolgus monkey could
provide a good animal model in which to study RBC apla-
sia and congenital anomalies as a correlate to the human
disease. The number of animals required is quite large, and
such studies would be rather expensive.Nevertheless, if
human parvovirus B19 were perceived to be a serious pub-
lic health threat, these studies could be considered.
Because the current solvent/detergent method of in-
activating viruses in blood products is ineffective against
parvovirus B19, other decontamination treatments should
be explored.
SUMMARY
This 1-day workshop showed that the infectivity of B19 DNA
in donor blood and the neutralizing action of different an-
tibodies present in the donated blood are not yet fully un-
derstood. It/is possible that B19-induced anemia and
reticulocytopenia are not being recognized in transfused
recipients other than those in specific risk groups. The test-
ing of blood components for any infectious agent is usually
clinically driven, and, if B19 NAT wererecommended at the
present time in other than plasma products, a CMV-like
model might prove appropri\te; that is, virus screening
would be performed on blood components destined for
high-risk groups only.CCrrently, there is insufficient evi-
dence to recommend universal testing, especially for single
units.Workshop participants recommended that basic re-
search continue in the scientific areas addressed. If clini-
cal trials were to be developed, participants recommended
that they include special risk groups such as seronegative
pregnant women and children with malignancies who are
receiving chemotherapy.
REFERENCES
0
1.
Coss\rt YE, Field AM, C\nt B, Widdows D. Parvovirus-like
particles in human sera. Lancet 1975;1:72-3.
0
2
.
Anderson LJ, Young NS, eds. Monographs in virology: hu-
man parvovirus B19. Basel: Karger, 1997.
0
3
.
Cot;ore SF, Tattersall P. Ch\r\cteriz\tion and molecular
cloning of a human parvovirus genome. Science
1984;226:1161-5.
0
4
.
Shimomura S, Komatsu N, Frickhofen N, et al. First con-
tinuous propagation of B19 parvovirus in a cell line. Blood
1992;79:18-24.
0
5.
Munshi NC, Zhou S, Woody MJ, et al. Successful replication
of parvovirus B19 in the human megakaryocytic leukemia
cell line MB-02. J Virol 1993;67:562-6.
0
6.
Ozawa K, Young N. Ch\r\cteriz\tion of capsid and
noncapsid proteins of B19 parvovirus propagated in hu-
man erythroid bone marrow cell cultures. J Virol
1987;61:2627-30.
0
7.
Kajigaya S, Fujii H, Field A, et al. Self-assembled B19
parvovirus capsids, produced in a baculovirus system, are
antigenically and immunogenically similar to native viri-
ons. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1991;88:4646-50.
0
8
.
Ozawa K, Ayub J, Kajigaya S, et al. The gene encoding the
nonstructural protein of B19 (human) parvovirus may be
lethal in transfected cells. J Virol 1988;62:2884-9.
0
9.
Liu JM, Green SW, Shimada T, Young NS. A block in full-
length transcript maturation in cells nonpermissive for B19
parvovirus. JVirol 1992;66:4686-92.
10.
Brown KE, Anderson SM, Young NS. Erythrocyte P antigen:
cellular receptor for B19 parvovirus. Science 1993;262:114-7.
11.
Brown KE, Hibbs JR, Gallinella G, et al. Resistance to
parvovirus B19 infection due to lack of virus receptor
(erythrocyte P antigen). N Engl J Med 1994;330:1192-6.
12.
Weiland HT, Vermey-Keers C, Salimans MM, et al.
Parvovirus B19 associated with fetal abnormality (letter).
Lancet 1987;1:682-3.
13.
Koch WC, Adler SP. Human parvovirus B19 infections in
women of childbearing age and within families. Pediatr In-
fect Dis J 1989;8:83-7.
14.
Anderson MJ, Higgins PG, Davis LR, et al. Experimental
parvoviral infection in humans. J Infect Dis 1985;152:257-
65.
15.
Brown KE. Human parvovirus B19 epidemiology and clini-
cal manifestations. In: Anderson LJ, Young NS, eds. Mono-
graphs in virology: human parvovirus B19. Basel: Karger,
1997:42-60.
16.
Frickhofen N, Abkowitz JL, Safford M, et al. Persistent B19
parvovirus infection in patients infected with human im-
munodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1): a treatable cause of
anemia in AIDS. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:926-33.
17.
Brown KE, Young NS. Human parvovirus B19 infections in
infants and children. Adv Pediatr Infect Dis 1997;13:101-26.
18.
Soderlund M, von Essen R, Haapasaari J, et al. Persistence
of parvovirus B19 DNA in synovial membranes of young
patients with and without chronic arthropathy. Lancet
1997;349:1063-5.
19.
Brown KE. What threat is human parvovirus B19 to the fe-
tus? A review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:764-7.
2
0
.
Miller E, Fairley CK, Cohen BJ, Seng C. Immediate and long
term outcome of human parvovirus B19 infection in preg-
nancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:174-8.
2
1.
Anlar B, Öktem F, Török T. Human parvovirus B19 antibod-
ies in infantile autism. J Child Neurol 1994;9:104-5.
2
2
.
Török TJ, Andrews I, Conry JA, et al. Congenit\l central ner-
vous system disease following intrauterine parvovirus B19
infection (abstract). Presented at the 5th Parvovirus Work-
shop, Cryst\l River, Florida, Nov 7-5, 1993.
2
3
.
Brown KE, Green SW, Antunez de Mayolo J, et al. Congeni-
tal anaemia after transplacental B19 parvovirus infection.
Lancet 1994;343:895-6.

PARVOVIRUS B19 IN TRANSFUSION MEDICINE
Volume 41, January 2001
TRANSFUSION
1l
www.transfusion.org
2
4
.
Pattison JR, Jones SE, Hodgson J, et al. Parvovirus infections
and hypoplastic crisis in sickle-cell anaemia. Lancet
1981;1:664-5.
2
5.
Chorb\ T, Cocci\ P, Holman RC, et al. The role of
parvovirus B19 in aplastic crisis and erythema infectiosum
(fifth disease). J Infect Dis 1986;154:383-93.
2
6.
Kurtzman GJ, Ozawa K, Cohen B, et al. Chronic bone mar-
row failure due to persistent B19 parvovirus infection. N
Engl J Med 1987;317:287-94.
2
7.
Kurtzman GJ, Cohen BJ, Field AM, et al. Immune response
to B19 parvovirus and an antibody defect in persistent viral
infection. J Clin Invest 1989;84:1114-23.
2
8
.
Saikawa T, Anderson S, Momoeda M, et al. Neutralizing lin-
ear epitopes of B19 parvovirus cluster in the VP1 unique
and VP1-VP2 junction regions. JVirol 1993;67:3004-9.
2
9.
Agbandje M, Kajigaya S, McKenna R, et al. The structure of
human parvovirus B19 at 8 A resolution. Virology
1994;203:106-15.
3
0
.
Bostic JR, Brown KE, Young NS, Koenig S. Quantitative
analysis of neutralizing immune responses to human
parvovirus B19 using a novel reverse transcriptase-poly-
merase chain reaction-based assay. J Infect Dis
1999;179:619-26.
3
1.
O’SClliv\n MG, Anderson DC, Fikes JD, et \l. Identific\tion
of a novel simian parvovirus in cynomolgus monkeys with
severe anemia: a paradigm of human B19 parvovirus infec-
tion. J Clin Invest 1994;93:1571-6.
3
2
.
O’Sullivan MG, Veille JC, Block WA, et al. Hydrops fetalis
induced by simian parvovirus (abstract). Presented at the
17th Annual Meeting, American Society for Virology,
Vancouver, BC, C\n\d\, July:99.
3
3
.
Erdman DD. Human parvovirus B19: laboratory diagnosis.
In: Anderson LJ, Young NS, eds. Monographs in virology:
human parvovirus B19. Basel: Karger, 1997:93-104.
3
4
.
Azzi A, Morfini M, Mannucci PM. The transfusion-associ-
ated transmission of parvovirus B19. Transfus Med Rev
1999;13:194-204.
3
5.
Cohen BJ, Beard S, Knowles WA, et al. Chronic anemia due
to parvovirus B19 infection in a bone marrow transplant
patient after platelet transfusion. Transfusion 1997;37:947-
52.
3
6.
Zanella A, Rossi F, Ces\n\ C, et al. Transfusion-transmitted
human parvovirus B19 infection in a thalassemic patient.
Transfusion 1995;35:769-72.
3
7.
Jordan J, Tiangco B, Kiss J, Koch W. Human parvovirus B19:
prevalence of viral DNA in volunteer blood donors and
clinical outcomes of transfusion recipients. Vox Sang
1998;75:97-102.
3
8
.
Wakamatsu C, Takakura F, Kpima E, et al. Screening of
blood donors for human parvovirus B19 and characteriza-
tion of the results. Vox Sang 1999;76:14-21.
3
9.
Nguyen QT, Sifer C, Schneider V, et al. Novel human
erythrovirus associated with transient aplastic anemia. J
Clin Microbiol 1999;37:2483-7.
SPEAKERS
Larry Anderson, MD
Respiratory & Enterovirus Laboratory
CDC
K
evin E. Brown, MD
Hematology Branch
NHLBI, NIH
Bernard J. Cohen, PhD
Enteric & RespiratoryVirus Laboratory
Central Public Health Laboratory (UK)
Roger Y.Dodd, PhD
Transmissible Diseases Department
American Red Cross
Ted Eastlund, MD
Blood Bank
University of Minnesota Medical School
Joan Pehta, MD
Vitex Technologies, Inc.
Harvey Klein, MD
Department of Transfusion Medicine
Clinic\l Center, NIH
M
argot Kruskall, MD
Division of LaboratoryTransfusion Medicine
Beth Israel Hospital
Naomi Luban, MD
Department of Laboratory Medicine
Children’s National Medical Center
Neil Young, MD
Hematology Branch
NHLBI, NIH
Thomas J. Lynch, JD, PhD
Division of Hematology, FDA
ORGANIZERS
Barbara Alving, MD
Division of Blood Diseases and Resources
NHLBI, NIH
L
uiz H. Barbosa, DVM
Division of Blood Diseases and Resources
NHLBI, NIH
George J. Nemo, PhD
Division of Blood Diseases and Resources
NHLBI, NIH
„
6


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11305]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04088]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0114]

Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays Within the Fifth Coast Guard
District

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for a fireworks
display at The Wharf DC on April 2, 2022, to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulation for
Fireworks Displays within the Fifth Coast Guard District identifies the
safety zone for this event in Washington, DC. During the enforcement
period, the operator of any vessel in the safety zone must comply with
directions from the Patrol Commander or any Official Patrol displaying
a Coast Guard ensign.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 165.506 will be enforced for the
location identified in line no. 1 of table 2 to 33 CFR 165.506(h)(2)
from 7:30 p.m. until 9 p.m. on April 2, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email MST3 Melissa Kelly, Sector
Maryland-NCR, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard:
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The Coast Guard will enforce the safety
zone regulation for a fireworks display at The Wharf DC from 7:30 p.m.
to 9 p.m. on April 2, 2022. This action is being taken to provide for
the safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. Our
regulation for Fireworks Displays within the Fifth Coast Guard
District, Sec.  165.506, specifies the location of the safety zone for
the fireworks show which encompasses portions of the Washington Channel
in the Upper Potomac River. During the enforcement period, as reflected
in Sec.  165.506(d), if you are the operator of a vessel in the safety
zone you must comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or any
Official Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.

    Dated: February 22, 2022.
David E. O'Connell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2022-04088 Filed 2-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


         Improving the Display of Facility Compliance History in ECHO

1 - Issue Summary

U.S. EPA and states are cooperating to improve the display, usability, and accuracy of EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO). ECHO is a critical tool for accessing and analyzing information about facilities regulated under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act. ECHO supports transparency of compliance and enforcement data and program management. ECHO aggregates information across regulatory programs and across state, tribal, territorial, and federal regulatory authorities. In doing so, ECHO must account for considerable variation among programs and agencies and display information about regulated facilities that is accurate, understandable, and helpful to the public, the regulated community, and partner agencies. Placing data in the proper context for ECHO users requires thoughtful design, careful selection of terminology, and informed use of the available data.

As co-regulators, states and EPA are committing to a process that will enable more collective stewardship over the presentation, accuracy, and completeness of data in ECHO. That process will ultimately produce a model for joint governance, communication, and decision-making. We expect that this cooperation will boost ECHO's usefulness, accuracy, and impact.

As a first step, a team of state and EPA representatives has identified some changes to ECHO that will enhance the user experience and improve ECHO's display of facility compliance-related data. After seeking stakeholder input on these proposed changes, the team is now recommending that EPA implement these changes in ECHO Lab so that co-regulators can view the changes and ensure that they meet their needs.

2 - Changes Impacting All Media

 ECHO will discontinue use of the term "Compliance Status" on facility searches and the Detailed Facility Report. Instead, ECHO will use the label "Compliance History" to avoid the implication that the current compliance status of a facility is known. (For example, on the Detailed Facility Report, the "Three Year Compliance Status by Quarter" table would be labeled "Three-Year Compliance History by Quarter".)
 Eliminate the 12-Quarter Violation History grid that appears at the top right of the Detailed Facility Report.
 On the detailed Facility Report, violation details table (currently "Three Year Compliance Status by Quarter"):
 By default, display compliance history information by month and provide a user with the capability to toggle between the quarterly history display.
 Violation periods (non-HPV/SNC) will be labeled with the text "Violation Identified" (rather than "In Violation") with help text to indicate that a violation was identified during the displayed time period; in subsequent periods in which violations remain unresolved, based on the lack of a Resolved Date in ICIS-Air, the text will read "Violation-Unresolved" to indicate that one or more violations are unresolved but not newly identified. These new labels will present the data in a more appropriate context because the available information cannot support determinations about a facility's up-to-the-minute compliance status.
 Periods without a violation will display blue boxes indicating "No Violation Identified". This also applies to the Enforcement and Compliance Summary at the top of the Detailed Facility Report.
 ECHO will now provide the date of the last data refresh on the Detailed Facility Report.

3 - Changes Impacting Clean Water Act Data Only

 Detailed Facility Report, violation details table:
 ECHO will add the ability for the user to display all monthly DMR exceedances in a quarter (currently, only the worst monthly exceedance in a quarter is displayed). If there was no DMR exceedance during a given month, the user also will see that reflected.
 For NPDES DMR non-receipt violations, the team recommends that ECHO display information to distinguish between DMRs received late versus not at all, if the source system can be enhanced to allow for this.

4 - Changes Impacting Air Data Only

Many agencies have expressed an interest in optionally displaying a more precise date range for Federally Reportable Violations (FRVs) in ECHO. Agencies will now be able to select their preference from one of the options below. The intent is to support all three of these display options and allow agencies to choose the one that offers the best fit for their circumstances.

Option 1a: Violation Identified  -  WITH Date Range using Determined to Resolved Dates
On the Detailed Facility Report, ECHO will display violations with the label "Violation Identified" or "Violation" in a given time period (quarter or month) AND ECHO will display the start and end dates of the FRV using information from ICIS-Air. ECHO will use the FRV Determination Date as the Start Date for an FRV. Agencies will voluntarily populate that field in ICIS-Air with the date that is most appropriate for their program's policies and procedures (consistent with the 2014 FRV Policy). ECHO will use the Resolved Date from the ICIS-Air Case File as the End Date for an FRV. Agencies will voluntarily link formal enforcement actions to the case file containing FRVs where applicable, and in the absence of formal enforcement, populate the Resolving Action Type and Date fields with the action type and date that are most appropriate for their program's policies and procedures.

Option 1b: Violation Identified  -  WITH Date Range using Occurrence Start and End Dates
This option is identical to Option 1a, but it would use different sources of FRV start and end dates. Under this option, ECHO will use the Violation Occurrence Start Date as the Start Date for an FRV and the Occurrence End Date as the End Date for an FRV. Agencies selecting this option will voluntarily populate the Occurrence Start and End Dates. Please note that this option will require a change to an ICIS-Air business rule because these data fields are currently part of a sensitive area of ICIS-Air that is unavailable for extract to ECHO. Also, it's possible to have multiple violations on a case file with different time periods. Further discussion would recommend how violations should be displayed when there are multiple violations for a case file with different occurrence dates.

      Option 2: Violation Identified  -  NO Date Range
      On the Detailed Facility Report, ECHO will display violations with the label "Violation Identified" in a given time period (quarter or month). This option continues current practice in which ECHO uses the FRV Determination Date in ICIS-Air to drive the display of an FRV without a date range. The FRV Determination Date is either reported voluntarily by the agency or auto-generated by ICIS-Air to match the date on which the agency submitted the violation data to ICIS-Air. Under Option 2, ECHO will also display explanatory text that reads "Resolved Not Indicated" to inform a user that ECHO doesn't have data on when a violation was resolved.

New ECHO Explanatory Caveat

Offering multiple FRV display options gives agencies the flexibility to choose a solution that best fits their own circumstances and programs. However, this will also result in some inconsistency in how FRVs are displayed in ECHO and how individual agencies define these date fields. The team has developed the following caveat language for the ECHO website to help users understand the variation among agencies' information:

   EPA requests state and local environmental agencies provide data associated with Federally Reportable Violations (FRVs) that is thereafter displayed in ECHO. These agencies submit data in accordance with minimum EPA requirements. In so doing, these agencies have varied processes for how they provide such information. To accommodate for this variation in FRV reporting, EPA has updated the ECHO display of data to allow the states/locals to choose to report FRVs consistent with one of the following approaches:

 Agencies use the FRV Determination Date and the Resolved Date to display an FRV date range in ECHO. These include...
 Agencies use the Violation Occurrence Start Date and the Occurrence End Date to display an FRV date range in ECHO. These include...
 Agencies use the FRV Determination Date to display in ECHO the date when the FRV was identified. These include...

Note Regarding FRV Data Reporting

Data elements that drive the display of FRVs in ECHO (such as the fields discussed above) are not currently required by the ICIS-Air Information Collection Request (ICR). States/locals and EPA have noted that this can contribute to inconsistencies among data from different agencies and that it also differs from reporting requirements for High Priority Violations (HPVs). As a long-term approach to addressing issues with FRV data, states, EPA, and other stakeholders may wish to jointly consider the value of streamlining and modifying the required data set under the ICIS-Air ICR. The content of the ICR is due for reconsideration in advance of its expiration in January 2019.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 29743]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1806-003; ER11-1939-001.
    Applicants: AP Gas & Electric (PA), LLC, AP Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Notification of Non-Material Change in Status of AP
Holdings, LLC and AP Gas & Electric (PA), LLC.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110505-5171.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, May 26, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2092-002.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Vermillion II, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Vermillion II, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35: Compliance Filing to be effective 5/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110505-5077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, May 26, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2848-001.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35: Service Agreement No. 174 compliance filing to be effective 11/
19/2010.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110505-5147.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, May 26, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3579-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Queue No. W2-016; Original Service Agreement No. 2924
to be effective 4/20/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5038.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 07, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3580-000.
    Applicants: Domtar Corporation.
    Description: Domtar Corporation submits tariff filing per 35.15:
Domtar Corporation Notice of Cancellation of MBR Tariff to be effective
7/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 07, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3581-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Monongahela Power Company,
American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Monongahela Power, et al., submits the Third Revised
Service Agreement No. 1395, to be effective 5/17/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 7, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign
utility company status filings:

    Docket Numbers: FC11-6-000.
    Applicants: Inversiones Eolicas, S. de R. L. de C.V.
    Description: Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status
of Inversiones Eolicas, S. de R. L. de C.V.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 7, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 17, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12566 Filed 5-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 62 (Friday, April 2, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17275-17278]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06771]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0801; Product Identifier 2019-SW-101-AD; Amendment
39-21472; AD 2021-06-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-07-08
for Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Airbus Helicopters) Model MBB-
BK 117 D-2 helicopters. AD 2017-07-08 required repetitively inspecting
each engine mount elastomeric bushing (elastomeric bushing). Since the
FAA issued AD 2017-07-08, Airbus Helicopters has designed an improved
engine mount metal bushing (metal bushing). This new AD retains the
inspection requirements of AD 2017-07-08 and requires replacing each
affected engine mount bushing with an improved engine mount bushing,
while also requiring repetitive inspections of the improved engine
mount bushing. This AD also prohibits installing an elastomeric bushing
on any helicopter. The actions of this AD are intended to address an
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 7, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2020-0801.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2020-0801; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, any service information that is
incorporated by reference, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, AD Program Manager,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to remove AD 2017-07-08, Amendment 39-18846 (82 FR 16895,
April 7, 2017) (AD 2017-07-08), and add a new AD. AD 2017-07-08 applied
to Airbus Helicopters Model MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopters and required
repetitive visual inspections of each elastomeric bushing of the inner
and outer forward trusses of both engines, and depending on the outcome
of the inspections, repairing or replacing the elastomeric bushings. AD
2017-07-08 was prompted by EASA AD 2015-0198, dated September 30, 2015
(EASA AD 2015-0198), issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for
the Member States of the European Union. EASA advised that during a
pre-flight check of a Model MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopter, an elastomeric
bushing was found delaminated. More cases of delaminated elastomeric
bushings were reported following additional investigations. According
to EASA, this condition could lead to cracks and eventually failure of
the engine mount front support pins, possibly resulting in loss of
helicopter control.
    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 27, 2020 (85
FR 52931) and was prompted by EASA issuing a series of ADs to supersede
EASA AD 2015-0198. EASA issued AD 2019-0030, dated February 13, 2019
(EASA AD 2019-0030), to supersede EASA AD 2015-0198. EASA AD 2019-0030
advises that Airbus Helicopters has designed an improved engine mount
bushing P/N B712M10X1001, which when installed becomes a terminating
action for the repetitive inspections of elastomeric bushing P/N 105-
60386. Accordingly, EASA AD 2019-0030 requires installation of improved
engine mount bushing P/N B712M10X1001 and also prohibits the
installation of elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386 on any Model MBB-BK
117 D-2 helicopter. Since EASA issued AD 2019-0030, occurrences were
reported of finding damaged metal bushings. EASA issued AD 2019-0275,
dated November 7, 2019 (EASA AD 2019-0275), which retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2019-0030 and requires repetitive visual
inspections of the metal bushings. EASA AD 2019-0275 also updates the
terminology used in the definitions section from affected part to
elastomeric bushing and from serviceable part to metal bushing. The
NPRM proposed to retain the repetitive visual inspections of AD 2017-
07-08 and proposed to require installing metal bushing part number (P/
N) B712M10X1001, which would terminate the repetitive inspections of
elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386. The NPRM also proposed to require
repetitive inspections of metal bushing P/N B712M10X1001 and prohibit
the installation of elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386 on any
helicopter.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule, but the FAA did not receive any comments on
the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA of the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is issuing this AD after
evaluating all of the information provided by EASA and determining the
unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of these same type design and that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2019-0275 allows a non-cumulative tolerance of 10 hours
time-in-service for its required compliance times. This AD does not.
EASA AD 2019-0275 requires reporting inspection results to Airbus
Helicopters Deutschland GmbH if any worn or heavily worn metal is
found, whereas this AD does not.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
MBB-BK117 D-2-71A-002, Revision 1, dated December 14, 2018. This
service information specifies instructions for repetitive visual
inspections of elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386 for defects,
deformation, separation of the rubber, and missing rubber. If there is
any deformation or separation of the rubber, this service information
provides instructions to replace the affected parts with serviceable
parts. This service information also specifies replacing elastomeric
bushings P/N 105-60386 with metal bushings P/N B712M10X1001. This
service information also does not allow the new metal bushings P/N
B712M10X1001 to be installed on any helicopter together with the
elastomeric bushings P/N 105-60386. This service information also
prohibits installing elastomeric bushings P/N 105-60386 after
installation of new metal bushings P/N B712M10X1001.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters ASB MBB-BK117 D-2-71A-011,
Revision 0, dated October 16, 2019. This service information specifies
instructions for repetitive inspections of

the metal bushings P/N B712M10X1001 of the inner and outer forward
trusses for worn metal bushings (gapping between the inner and outer
truss less than 1mm) and heavily worn metal bushings (inner and outer
metal bushings showing contact marks or worn out metal mesh).
    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters AMM BK117 C2C2e, dated
August 7, 2018. This service information specifies instructions for a
detailed inspection of the engine mount bushings.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 30 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85
per work-hour.
    Inspecting the engine mount bushings will take about 1 work-hour,
for an estimated cost of $85 per helicopter and $2,550 for the U.S.
fleet. Replacing the three engine mount bushings will take about 8
work-hours and parts would cost about $2,505, for an estimated cost of
$3,185 per helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-07-08, Amendment 39-18846
(82 FR 16895, April 7, 2017); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

2021-06-05 Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Amendment 39-21472;
Docket No. FAA-2020-0801; Product Identifier 2019-SW-101-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to Airbus Helicopters
Deutschland GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopters, certificated in
any category, with an engine mount elastomeric bushing (elastomeric
bushing) part number (P/N) 105-60386 or an engine mount metal
bushing (metal bushing) P/N B712M10X1001 installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a delaminated
elastomeric bushing. This condition could result in excessive
vibration, which could lead to cracking and failure of the engine
mount front support pins, and loss of helicopter control.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2017-07-08, Amendment 39-18846 (82 FR 16895,
April 7, 2017).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 7, 2021.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) For helicopters with an elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386
installed, within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) and thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS:
    (i) Visually inspect each elastomeric bushing for separation of
the rubber from the metal or missing rubber by following Section
3.B.2 of Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) MBB-BK117
D-2-71A-002, Revision 1, dated December 14, 2018.
    (ii) If any rubber has separated from the metal or if there is
missing rubber, before further flight, inspect the elastomeric
bushing for deformation, corrosion, and mechanical damage.
    (A) Replace the elastomeric bushing with an airworthy engine
mount bushing if there is any deformation, separation of the rubber
from the metal, corrosion, or mechanical damage, or repair the
elastomeric bushing if the deformation, separation of the rubber,
corrosion, or mechanical damage is within the maximum repair damage
limitations.
    (B) If the inner and outer parts of the elastomeric bushing are
separated with missing rubber, before further flight, replace the
elastomeric bushing with an airworthy engine mount bushing.
    (2) For helicopters with a metal bushing P/N B712M10X1001
installed, within 100 hours TIS, and thereafter every 100 hours TIS,
visually inspect the metal bushing of the inner and outer forward
trusses for gapping between the inner and outer truss, contact marks
on the inner and outer engine mount bushings, and worn out metal
mesh.
    (i) If there is gapping between the inner and outer truss less
than 1mm, within 50 hours TIS, replace the metal bushing with an
airworthy engine mount bushing.
    (ii) If there is gapping between the inner and outer truss of
1mm or greater than 1mm, contact marks on the inner or outer engine
mount bushings, or worn out metal mesh, before further flight,
replace the metal bushing with an airworthy engine mount bushing.
    (3) For helicopters with an elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386
installed, within 300 hours TIS, replace each elastomeric bushing P/
N 105-60386 with metal bushing P/N B712M10X1001.
    (4) Performing the actions required by paragraph (f)(3) of this
AD constitutes a terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (5) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install
elastomeric bushing P/N 105-60386 on any helicopter.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Fuller, AD
Program Manager, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, the FAA suggests
that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office
or

certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Airbus Helicopters ASB MBB-BK117 D-2-71A-011, Revision 0,
dated October 16, 2019, and Airbus Helicopters AMM BK117 C2C2e,
dated August 7, 2018, which are not incorporated by reference,
contain additional information about the subject of this AD. This
service information is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (j)(3) and (4) of this AD.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) 2019-0275, dated November 7, 2019. You
may view the EASA AD on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2020-0801.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 7200, Engine
(Turbine, Turboprop).

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin MBB-BK117 D-2-71A-
002, Revision 1, dated December 14, 2018.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on March 5, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-06771 Filed 4-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 39845]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13062]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0041; 10986-01-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; RadNet
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``RadNet'' (EPA ICR No.
0877.15, OMB Control No. 2060-0015) to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through March 31, 2024. 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.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 21, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0041, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or
by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Griggs, OAR/ORIA/NAREL,
Environmental Protection Agency, National Analytical Radiation
Environmental Laboratory, 540 South Morris Ave., Montgomery, AL 36115;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. 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. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: RadNet is a national network of stations collecting
environmental media that include air, precipitation, and drinking
water. Samples are sent to EPA's National Analytical Radiation
Environmental Lab (NAREL) in Montgomery, Alabama, where they are
analyzed for radioactivity. RadNet provides emergency response/homeland
security and ambient monitoring information on levels of environmental
radiation across the nation. All stations operators participate in
RadNet voluntarily. Station operators complete information forms that
accompany the samples. The forms request information pertaining to
sample type, sample location, start and stop date and times for
sampling, length of sampling period, and volume represented. Data from
RadNet are made available regularly on the Agency websites--Envirofacts
and the EPA website www.epa.gov/radnet.
    Form numbers: RadNet Air Particulate Sample (EPA Form 5900-24);
RadNet Precipitation Report Form (EPA Form 5900-27); RadNet Drinking
Water Report Form (EPA Form 5900-29); and RadNet Supply Request Form
(EPA Form 5900-23).
    Respondents/affected entities: Primarily State and Local Officials.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 213.
    Frequency of response: Varies depending upon sample media type.
Responses vary from twice weekly to quarterly.
    Total estimated burden: 3,640 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $2,622,124 (per year), includes annualized
capital costs, operational costs, and maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: There is a 2.2 percent reduction in burden
from 3,722 hours annually. While the RadNet network is fully
established and operating with essentially no changes expected, 30% of
the drinking water sampling locations have not responded since the
beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a 4.5 percent increase in
costs due to increases in federal and contractor salaries and cost of
goods and supplies.

Jonathan D. Edwards,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. 2023-13062 Filed 6-16-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 10686]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04177]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Parts 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0016]

Policy Implementing the Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping Final Rule; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the availability of nine Navigation
and Vessel Inspection Circulars (NVICs), which are the first set of a
series of NVICs to implement the final rule that aligned Coast Guard
regulations with amendments to the International Convention on
Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers,
and made changes to national endorsements. These NVICs will provide
guidance to mariners concerning new regulations governing merchant
mariner certificates and endorsements to Merchant Mariner Credentials
(MMC).

DATES: These NVICs are effective on February 26, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
document, call or email Luke B. Harden, Mariner Credentialing Program
Policy Division (CG-CVC-4), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing material in the
docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Viewing Documents

    The nine NVICs listed below are available in the docket and can be
viewed by going to www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2014-0016 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.''

Discussion

    On December 24, 2014, the Coast Guard published a Final Rule in the
Federal Register (78 FR 77796) to implement the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978 (STCW Convention), including the 2010 amendments to the
STCW Convention, and the Seafarers' Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping Code. The final rule also made changes to reorganize,
clarify, and update regulations for credentialing merchant mariners. In
the future, the Coast Guard will issue additional NVICs to provide
further guidance on the implementation of the new regulations regarding
merchant mariner certificates and endorsements to MMCs. The nine NVICs
listed below represent the first phase of this effort:
    1. Guidance on the Issuance of Medical Certificates (NVIC 01-14).
This NVIC describes policy for the issuance of medical certificates to
merchant mariners.
    2. Grandfathering and Transitional Provisions for Merchant Mariner
Credentials (NVIC 02-14). This NVIC describes grandfathering and
transitional provisions for MMCs.
    3. Guidelines for Approval of Training Courses and Programs (NVIC
03-14). This NVIC describes policy for documentation, submission, and
approval of merchant mariner training.
    4. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements for
Proficiency in Survival Craft and Rescue Boats Other Than Fast Rescue
Boats (NVIC 04-14). This NVIC describes policy for merchant mariners to
qualify for and renew MMC endorsements for Proficiency in Survival
Craft and Proficiency in Survival Craft-Limited.
    5. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements for
Proficiency in Fast Rescue Boats (NVIC 05-14). This NVIC describes
policy for merchant mariners to qualify for and renew MMC endorsements
for Proficiency in Fast Rescue Boats.
    6. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements as Rating
Forming Part of a Navigational Watch (NVIC 06-14). This NVIC describes
policy for merchant mariners to qualify for and renew MMC endorsements
as Rating Forming Part of a Navigational Watch.
    7. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements as Rating
Forming Part of an Engineering Watch (NVIC 07-14). This NVIC describes
policy for merchant mariners to qualify for and renew MMC endorsements
as Rating Forming Part of an Engineering Watch.
    8. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements for Basic
Training (Formerly Basic Safety Training) (NVIC 08-14). This NVIC
describes policy for merchant mariners to qualify for and renew
endorsements to an MMC for Basic Training.
    9. Guidelines for Qualification for STCW Endorsements for Advanced
Firefighting (NVIC 09-14). This NVIC describes policy for merchant
mariners to qualify for and renew MMC endorsements for Advanced
Firefighting.
    Although all of these NVICs are important to the implementation of
the new regulations, note that NVICs 01-14, 02-14, and 03-14 will be
particularly helpful during the beginning of the transition to those
regulations.

Authority

    This document is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: January 29, 2014.
Jonathan C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director, Inspection & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-04177 Filed 2-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5454-5457]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01800]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0049; Directorate Identifier 2014-SW-037-AD;
Amendment 39-18096; AD 2015-02-27]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters (Previously
Eurocopter France) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-19-19 for
certain Eurocopter France Model AS332C, AS332L, AS332L1, AS332L2, and
EC225LP helicopters. AD 2013-19-19 required replacing certain serial-
numbered main gearbox (MGB) bevel gear vertical shafts and inspecting
and replacing, if necessary, each MGB bevel gear vertical shaft
(shaft). This new AD requires the same actions as AD 2013-19-19 but
corrects an error in the term used to identify an inspection
qualification and updates the type certificate holder's name. This AD
is prompted by two incidents of emergency ditching after warning
indications of loss of MGB oil pressure. These actions are intended to
detect a cracked shaft, which could result in loss of MGB oil pressure,
loss of the MGB lubrication system, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective February 17, 2015.
    We must receive comments on this AD by April 3, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus
Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at
http://www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub. You may review the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Blyn, Aviation Safety Engineer,
Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, we
invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written
comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that resulted
from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the AD, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit them only one time. We will file in the docket all comments that
we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning this rulemaking during the
comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may
conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

    On September 9, 2013, we issued AD 2013-19-19 (78 FR 60188, October
1, 2013), which required replacing certain

serial-numbered shafts because they are no longer airworthy. Also, AD
2013-19-19 required certain inspections at specified intervals of each
shaft for a crack and, if there is a crack, replacing the shaft with an
airworthy part before further flight. AD 2013-19-19 was prompted by two
incidents of emergency ditching after warning indication of loss of oil
pressure. A full circumferential crack of the lower shaft occurred in
the area where two sections of the shaft are welded together. As a
result, the shaft stopped driving the main and backup oil pumps,
leading to warning indications of the loss of the MGB lubrication. The
crew activated the MGB emergency lubrication system, and following a
warning that indicated failure of that system, performed a controlled
ditching into the sea. The actions in AD 2013-19-19 were intended to
detect a cracked shaft, which could result in loss of MGB oil pressure,
loss of the MGB lubrication system, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.
    AD 2013-19-19 was prompted by AD No. 2013-0138R1, dated July 15,
2013, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member
States of the European Union, to correct an unsafe condition for the
Eurocopter Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS332L2, and EC225LP
helicopters, all serial numbers, with certain part-numbered shafts,
installed. EASA advises of two events of the Model EC225LP helicopters
where an emergency ditching was performed after warning indication of
MGB loss of oil pressure and subsequent additional red alarm on the MGB
emergency lubrication system (EMLUB). EASA also advises of a full
circumferential crack of the lower shaft in the area where the two
sections of the shaft are welded together. As a result, the vertical
shaft ceased to drive the main and backup oil pumps leading to warning
indications of the loss of the MGB main and standby oil lubrication
systems. The crew activated the EMLUB system and, following a
subsequent warning indicating failure of that system, performed a
controlled ditching into the sea.
    EASA advises that Eurocopter determined after investigating the
incidents that the shaft failures resulted from a combination of
factors, including stress hot-spots induced by the shaft geometry,
residual stresses in the shaft weld material resulting from the
manufacturing process, and corrosion pitting inside the shaft on areas
where gear spline wear particles accumulated.
    The EASA AD allows continued operations under certain conditions if
equipped with a Vibration Health Monitoring System (VHM).

Actions Since We Issued AD 2013-19-19

    After we issued AD 2013-19-19 (78 FR 60188, October 1, 2013), we
discovered an incorrect term used to identify the inspection
qualification for one of the inspections in the AD. Specifically, the
AD included in the Required Actions section, under paragraph
(e)(3)(ii), the following:

    ``Before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 11.5 hours TIS, remove the main jet and emergency spraying
jet, and ultrasonic inspect the shaft in the weld area for a crack,
which must be done by a Level II or Level III inspector certified in
the eddy current fault detection method in the Aeronautics Sector
according to the EN4179 or NAS410 standard, or''.

    As published, the term ``eddy current'' used to identify the
inspection qualification is incorrect. The correct term is
``ultrasonic.'' Also, since the issuance of AD 2013-19-19, the type
certificate holder's name changed from Eurocopter France to Airbus
Helicopters. This AD requires the same actions as AD 2013-19-19 but
corrects the inspection qualification and updates the type certificate
holder's name.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
France and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with France, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD interim action. The design approval holder is
currently developing a newly-designed shaft that will address the
unsafe condition identified in this AD. Once the newly-designed shaft
is developed, approved, and available, we might consider additional
rulemaking.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters) issued the following service
information:
     Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS332-01.00.82, Revision
3, dated July 8, 2013, for the Model AS332C, C1, L, L1, L2 civil
helicopters and Model AS332B, B1, M, M1, and F1 military model
helicopters. The ASB defines inspection requirements to detect a crack
in the shaft, and
     ASB No. EC225-04A009, Revision 3, dated July 8, 2013 for
Model EC225LP helicopters. The ASB defines inspection requirements to
detect a crack in the shaft.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires:
     Removing certain part-numbered and serial-numbered shafts
that are no longer considered airworthy from service.
     For certain model helicopters, before further flight and
at specified intervals, eddy current inspecting the shaft for a crack
in the area of the weld.
     For Model EC225LP helicopters, before further flight,
either installing a placard in full view of the pilot with the
following statement in red, 6 millimeter letters on a white background:
``MAXIMUM CONTINUOUS TORQUE LIMITED TO 70% DURING LEVEL FLIGHTS AT IAS
EQUAL TO OR MORE THAN 60 KTS,'' and before further flight and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 11.5 hours TIS, removing the main
jet and emergency spraying jet, and ultrasonic inspecting the shaft in
the weld area for a crack; or
     Before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 8 hours TIS, removing the main jet and emergency spraying jet,
and ultrasonic inspecting the shaft for a crack in the area of the
weld.
     Each eddy current or ultrasonic inspection be done by a
Level II or Level III operator certified in the eddy current or
ultrasonic fault detection method in the Aeronautics Sector according
to the EN4179 or NAS410 standard.
     If there is a crack, before further flight, replacing the
shaft with an airworthy part.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD allows continued operations under certain conditions if
equipped with a VHM. The VHM system is validated by FAA for information
only, and therefore we have not adopted that portion of the EASA AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 4 helicopters of U.S. Registry and
that operators may incur the following costs to comply with this AD. At
$85 per work hour; minimal cost to install a placard; and 3 work hours
to inspect each shaft for a crack, it will cost $255 per helicopter and
$1,020 for the fleet per inspection. It will take 44 work hours to
replace a shaft and $1,243,350

for required parts for a total of $1,247,090 per helicopter.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Providing an opportunity for public comments before adopting these
AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions needed to
correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that the risk
to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment before
adopting this rule because the required corrective actions must be done
within 10 hours TIS and at repeated intervals within short time
periods.
    Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for
public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

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, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2013-19-19, Amendment 39-17601 (78 FR 60188, October 1, 2013), and
adding the following new (AD):

2015-02-27 Airbus Helicopters (Previously Eurocopter France):
Amendment 39-18096; Docket No. FAA-2015-0049; Directorate Identifier
2014-SW-037-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332L,
AS332L1, AS332L2, and EC225LP helicopters with a main gearbox (MGB)
bevel gear vertical shaft (shaft), part number (P/N) 332A32-5101-00,
332A32-5101-05, 332A32-5101-10, or 332A32-5101-15, certificated in
any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a cracked shaft
resulting in loss of MGB oil pressure. These actions are intended to
prevent loss of the MGB lubrication system and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2013-19-19, Amendment 39-17601 (78 FR
60188, October 1, 2013).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective February 17, 2015.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight, remove shaft, P/N 332A32-5101-00,
332A32-5101-05, 332A32-5101-10, or 332A32-5101-15, with S/N M330
through M340 (inclusive) and S/N M370 through M5000 (inclusive) from
service, which are no longer considered airworthy.
    (2) For Model AS332C, AS332L, AS332L1, and AS332L2 helicopters,
before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10
hours time-in-service (TIS), eddy current inspect the shaft for a
crack in the area of the weld, which must be done by a Level II or
Level III inspector certified in the eddy current fault detection
method in the Aeronautics Sector according to the EN4179 or NAS410
standard.
    (3) For Model EC225LP helicopters, either do paragraphs (3)(i)
and (3)(ii) or do paragraph (3)(iii).
    (i) Before further flight, install a placard in full view of the
pilot with the following statement in red, 6 millimeter letters on a
white background: ``MAXIMUM CONTINUOUS TORQUE LIMITED TO 70% DURING
LEVEL FLIGHTS AT IAS EQUAL TO OR MORE THAN 60 KTS,'' and
    (ii) Before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 11.5 hours TIS, remove the main jet and emergency spraying
jet, and ultrasonic inspect the shaft in the weld area for a crack,
which must be done by a Level II or Level III inspector certified in
the ultrasonic fault detection method in the Aeronautics Sector
according to the EN4179 or NAS410 standard, or
    (iii) Before further flight, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 8 hours TIS, remove the main jet and emergency spraying jet,
and ultrasonic inspect the shaft for a crack in the area of the
weld, which must be done by a Level II or Level III operator
certified in the ultrasonic fault detection method in the
Aeronautics Sector according to the EN4179 or NAS410 standard.
    (4) If there is a crack, before further flight, replace the
shaft with an airworthy part.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to James Blyn, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. AS332-01.00.82 and
Alert Service Bulletin No. EC225-04A009, both Revision 3 and both
dated July 8, 2013, which are not

incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the
subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD,
contact Airbus Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(972) 641-3775; or at http://www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub. You
may review a copy of the service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room
663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2013-0138R1, dated July 15, 2013. You
may view the EASA AD at http://www.regulations.gov in the Docket No.
FAA-2015-0049.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6320 Main rotor
gearbox.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 16, 2015.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-01800 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 154)]
[Notices]
[Page 45819]
[DOCID:fr10au06-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-54-000]

Broadwater Energy, LLC; Notice of Technical Meeting

August 2, 2006.
    On Tuesday August 22, 2006, at 10 a.m. (EDT), staff of the Office
of Energy Projects will meet with representatives of the U.S. Coast
Guard and Broadwater Energy, LLC regarding the proposed Broadwater
Floating Storage Regasification Unit. The purpose of the meeting is to
discuss technical information requested on June, 20, 2006, as a follow-
up to the June, 6 and 7, 2006, Cryogenic Design and Technical
Conference in Port Jefferson, New York. The meeting will be held in
Room 3M-3 at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission located at 888
1st Street, NE., Washington, DC.
    In view of the nature of critical energy infrastructure information
and security issues to be explored, the meeting will not be open to the
public. Attendance at this meeting will be limited to existing parties
to the proceeding (anyone who has specifically requested to intervene
as a party) and to representatives of interested Federal, state, and
local agencies. Any person planning to attend the August 22, 2006,
meeting must register by close of business on Monday, August 21, 2006.
Registrations may be submitted either online at http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/cryo-conf-form.asp
 or by faxing a copy of the

form (found at the referenced online link) to<PHONE_NUMBER>. All
attendees must sign a non-disclosure statement prior to entering the
meeting. For additional information regarding the meeting, please
contact Phil Suter at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-13046 Filed 8-9-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 51302]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-87]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1858-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

Georgia; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia (FEMA-1858-DR), dated September 24, 2009, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 28, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of September 24, 2009.

    Cherokee, DeKalb, Fulton, and Newton Counties for Public
Assistance, including direct Federal assistance (already designated
for Individual Assistance).
    Crawford County for Public Assistance, including direct Federal
assistance.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-24073 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P