[Federal Register: September 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 186)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59084-59086]
[DOCID:fr27se10-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0525; FRL-9206-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Control Technique Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil
Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland.
This SIP revision pertains to the control of volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from paper, film, and foil coatings. Specifically,
Maryland is amending its regulations by adopting the requirements of
EPA's Control Technique Guidelines (CTG) for Paper, Film, and Foil
Coatings. These amendments will reduce VOC emissions from this source
category. This action is being taken in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on November 26, 2010 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by October 27,
2010. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2010-0525 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0525, Maria A. Pino, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2010-0525. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov, index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy during normal business hours at
the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies
of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the
Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland
21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Wentworth,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Throughout this document, whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we mean EPA.
    On April 23, 2010, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)
submitted a formal revision to its SIP. This SIP revision (10-
02) consists of amendments to Regulation .07, Paper, Fabric, Vinyl and
Other Plastic Parts Coating, under the Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR) 26.11.19, Control of VOC from Specific Processes. These
amendments are necessary since Maryland has adopted the recommendations
contained in EPA's CTG (EPA 453/R-07-003, September 2007), for Paper,
Film, and Foil Coatings for the control of VOC emissions from this
source category.
    Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment
areas must include reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources of
emissions. Section 182(b)(2) provides that States must revise their
ozone SIP to include RACT for VOC sources covered by any CTG document
issued after November 15, 1990, and prior to the date of attainment.
EPA defines RACT as ``the lowest emission limitation that a particular
source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology
that is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility'' (44 FR 53761, September 17, 1979). In subsequent Federal
Register notices, EPA has addressed how States can meet the RACT
requirements of the CAA. EPA provides States with guidance concerning
what types of controls could constitute RACT for a given source
category through issuance of a CTG. The recommendations in the CTG are
based on available data and information and may not apply to a
particular situation based upon the circumstances. The State of
Maryland has adopted the recommendations contained in the September
2007 (EPA 453/R-07-003) CTG for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings as RACT
for this source category. The paper, film, and foil coatings product
category includes coatings that are applied to paper, film, or foil
surfaces in the manufacturing of several major product types for the
following industry sectors: pressure sensitive tape and labels
(including fabric coated for use in pressure sensitive tapes and
labels), photographic film, industrial and decorative laminates,
abrasive products (including fabric coated for use in abrasive
products), and flexible packaging (including coating of non-woven
polymer substrates for use in

flexible packaging). The category also includes coatings applied during
miscellaneous coating operations for several products including:
corrugated and solid fiber boxes, die-cut paper paperboard, and
cardboard, converted paper and paperboard not elsewhere classified,
folding paperboard boxes, including sanitary boxes, manifold business
forms and related products, plastic asceptic packaging, and carbon
paper and inked ribbons. Coatings performed on or in-line with any
offset lithographic, screen, letterpress, flexographic, rotogravure, or
digital printing press is not part of the paper, film, and foil coating
category.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The amendments to Regulation .07 of COMAR 26.11.19 consist of
revisions to the existing sections .07A--Definitions, and .07B--
Applicability, and the addition of a new Section D--Emission Standards
for Paper, Film, and Foil Product Coatings with VOC Emissions
(Potential to Emit) of 25 Tons or Greater Per Year. Since Maryland
adopted the recommendations contained in EPA's 2007 CTG for Paper,
Film, and Foil Coatings, these revisions to the Maryland SIP are
necessary. Specifically, the amendment to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>A--
Definitions, adds the following definitions used in the substantive
provisions of the regulation: coating line, coating solids applied,
flash-off area, paper, film, and foil product, paper, film, and foil
product coating, and pressure sensitive tape and label surface coating.
COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>, section .07B--Applicability, has been revised to
reflect the applicability requirements which are specific to coating
lines that have the potential to emit 25 tons per year (tpy) or greater
of VOC from this source category. Sources subject to this regulation
may either meet VOC emission limits or use an add-on emission control
device to reduce VOC emissions by 90 percent. In addition, the SIP
revision amends COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> by adding a new Section .07D--
Emission Standards for Paper, Film, and Foil Product Coatings with VOC
Emissions (Potential to Emit) of 25 Tons or Greater Per Year which
contains the emissions standards and air pollution control equipment
requirements for this source category. Specifically, a person who meets
the applicability level in Section B of MDE's regulation shall: (a) Use
add-on air pollution control equipment to reduce VOCs from the coating
line by an overall capture and control efficiency of at least 90
percent, by weight, or (b) meet the following emission standards for
each coating line installation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Emission standard (ratio)
                                   -------------------------------------
  Paper, film, and foil coatings     lb VOC/lb solids  lb VOC/lb coating
                                       or kg VOC/kg       or kg VOC/kg
                                          solids            coating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paper Film, and Foil Coating other               0.40               0.08
 than a Pressure Sensitive Tape
 and Label Surface Coating........
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label                0.20               0.06
 Surface Coating..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the amendments to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>, ``Volatile
Organic Compounds from Specific Processes,'' submitted by MDE on April
23, 2010 because they meet the recommendations for RACT contained in
EPA's September, 2007 CTG for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings.
Implementation of these amendments will result in additional reductions
of VOC emissions from this source category. EPA is publishing this rule
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However,
in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will
be effective on November 26, 2010 without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comment by October 27, 2010. If EPA receives adverse
comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using

practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 26, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action pertaining to Maryland's adoption
of the CTG standards for paper, film, and foil coatings may not be
challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

     Dated: September 7, 2010.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1070  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                  EPA-Approved Regulations in the Maryland SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State                                Additional
 Code of Maryland Administrative       Title/subject      effective     EPA approval date   explanation/citation
   Regulations (COMAR) citation                              date                             at 40 CFR 52.1100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds From Specific Processes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
<IP_ADDRESS>......................  Paper, fabric, vinyl      4/19/10  9/27/10 [Insert page  Revisions to Section
                                    and other plastic                  number where the      .07A, .07B and the
                                    parts coating.                     document begins].     addition of new
                                                                                Section .07D.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-23980 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 57 (Thursday, March 24, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16661-16667]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05964]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0287; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01602-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of broken P-
clamps on the pressure relief line and the motive flow line in the fuel
tanks, and a subsequent determination that certain service information
lacked instructions for maintaining appropriate clearance between
certain fuel tubes and their support brackets, and may also have led to
incorrect installation of certain TeflonTM sleeves. This
proposed AD was also prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. This proposed AD
would require inspecting the motive flow line, vent line, and related
parts, and adding support or additional clearance if necessary. This
proposed AD would also require inspection, and replacement or
relocation if necessary, of affected TeflonTM sleeves on the
vent line, and installation of TeflonTM sleeves on the vent
line at additional wing stations. This proposed AD would also require
revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable,
to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 9,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited, Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123
Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-
4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet https://dehavilland.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0287; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0287; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01602-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

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

Background

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2017-05R2, dated September
20, 2019 (CF-2017-05R2) (also referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in
the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0287.
    This proposed AD was prompted by reports of broken P-clamps on the
pressure relief line and the motive fuel line in the fuel tanks, as
well as fouling conditions between the motive flow line and the
collector tank partition wall in both fuel tanks. Later, certain
service information designed to mitigate these issues was found to not
contain instructions to support the motive flow line and vent line at
wing stations -371.019 and 371.019 in the fuel tanks or to maintain
appropriate clearance between the fuel tubes and their support brackets
at wing stations -371.019 and -209.109 in the left-hand fuel tank and
wing stations 371.019 and 209.019 in the right-hand fuel tank.
Bombardier issued Modification Summaries (ModSums) to provide
instructions for addressing the initial reports of inadequate
clearance. Bombardier later issued revised service information to
address this inadequate support and clearance on all affected
airplanes. Subsequently, the manufacturer determined that certain
service information was missing instructions to relocate certain
TeflonTM sleeves and certain other service information may
have caused TeflonTM sleeves to be incorrectly installed on
the vent line. The FAA is proposing this AD to address adverse impacts
on the integrity of the electrical bonding paths throughout the fuel
line, which could lead to arcing between the vent line and airplane
structure, and could result in

possible fuel tank ignition in the event of a lightning strike.
    See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited has issued the following
Bombardier service information.
     Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-18, Revision B, dated
April 20, 2017, which describes procedures for increasing the hole size
in the collector tank partition wall, inspecting the motive flow line
for damage, and replacing the associated grommet and motive flow line.
     Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19, Revision D, dated
February 16, 2018, which describes procedures for replacing the
affected single nut plate brackets and standoffs at the affected left-
hand (LH) and right-hand (RH) wing stations on the motive flow line and
pressure relief line; inspecting the motive flow line and vent line at
certain wing stations in the fuel tanks to ensure that these fuel tubes
are adequately supported; and inspecting the fuel tubes to verify that
an appropriate clearance has been maintained between the fuel tubes and
their support brackets.
     Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-24, dated November 27,
2017, which describes procedures for installing TeflonTM
sleeves on the vent line at the specified wing stations in the LH and
RH fuel tanks, inspecting the TeflonTM sleeve installation
on the vent line at those wing stations in the LH and RH fuel tanks,
and repositioning the TeflonTM sleeves.
     Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-25, dated November 27,
2017, which describes procedures for inspecting the TeflonTM
sleeve installation on the vent line in the LH and RH fuel tanks for
correct installation and damage, and replacing and repositioning the
TeflonTM sleeves.
    De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited has also issued the
following Bombardier service information, which describes procedures
for replacing the affected single nut plate brackets and standoffs on
the motive flow line and vent line at LH and RH wing stations. These
documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane
configurations.
     Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 1, dated
October 30, 2017.
     Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 2, dated June
12, 2018.
     Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 3, dated June
21, 2018.
     Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 4, dated July
27, 2018.
    De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited has also issued the
following Bombardier service information, which describes fuel systems
limitations. These documents are distinct because they apply to
different airplane configurations.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 Temporary Revision (TR) ALI-0192,
dated April 24, 2018, to Section 4--28 Fuel System Limitation, of Part
2, of the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Requirements Manual (MRM),
PSM 1-84-7.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 TR ALI-0193, dated April 24,
2018, to Section 5--00 Critical Design Configuration Control
Limitations, of the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 MRM, PSM 1-84-7.
    De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited has also issued the
following Bombardier service information, which describes new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations for fuel tank systems. These
documents are distinct because they apply to different airplane
configurations.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 Airplane Maintenance Manual (AMM)
TR 28-145, dated November 21, 2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-146, dated November 21,
2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-147, dated November 21,
2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-148, dated November 24,
2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-149, dated November 27,
2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Task Card Manual
(MTCM) Maintenance Task Card 000-28-520-704 (Config A01), Detailed
Inspection of the TeflonTM Sleeve on the Fuel Tank Vent Line
(LH), Revision 42, Amendment 0002, dated November 21, 2017.
     (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 MTCM Maintenance Task Card 000-
28-620-704 (Config A01), Detailed Inspection of the TeflonTM
Sleeve on the Fuel Tank Vent Line (RH), Revision 42, Amendment 0002,
dated November 21, 2017.
    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.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described. This proposed AD would
allow using Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018 as a method of
compliance for the actions required by paragraph (h)(2) of this
proposed AD, provided the replacement of the affected single nut plate
brackets and standoffs on the motive flow line, vent line, pressure
relief line, and scavenge line at LH and RH wing stations Yw  209.019, Yw  317.019, and Yw  371.019,
is also done.
    This proposed AD would also require revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations for fuel tank systems.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and
Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs). Compliance
with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph
(n)(1) of this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 52 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Labor cost                      Parts cost            Cost per product     Cost on  U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 93 work-hours x $85 per hour =   Up to $7,862...........  Up to $15,767..........  Up to $819,884.
 Up to $7,905.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for revising the maintenance or inspection program.

    The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the
FAA recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator. In
the past, the FAA has estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per
airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program
changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-
operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate.
Therefore, the FAA estimates the total cost per operator to be $7,650
(90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).
    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2022-0287; Project
Identifier MCAI-2020-01602-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by May 9, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (type
certificate previously held by Bombardier, Inc.) Model DHC-8-400, -
401, and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial
numbers (S/Ns) 4001, 4003, and subsequent.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel System;
and 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of broken P-clamps on the
pressure relief line and the motive flow line in the fuel tanks, and
a subsequent determination that certain service information lacked
instructions for maintaining appropriate clearance between certain
fuel tubes and their support brackets, and may also have led to
incorrect installation of certain TeflonTM sleeves. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address adverse impacts on the integrity
of the electrical bonding paths throughout the fuel line, which
could lead to arcing between the vent line and airplane structure,
and could result in possible fuel tank ignition in the event of a
lightning strike.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definition

    For the purposes of this AD, ``prohibited tasks'' are defined as
any task identified in paragraph (l) of this AD and any procedure or
task that specifies fuel tank access using non-manufacturer-approved
procedures.

(h) Modifications

    (1) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4525
inclusive: Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, increase the hole
size in the collector tank partition wall, inspect the motive flow
line for damage, and replace the associated grommet and motive flow
line, in accordance with paragraph 3.B. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-18, Revision B,
dated April 20, 2017.
    (2) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4533
inclusive, on which Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19, dated
August 16, 2016; or Revision A, dated November 4, 2016, has not been
done: Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the affected single
nut plate brackets and standoffs at the affected left-hand (LH) and
right-hand (RH) wing stations on the motive flow line and pressure
relief line, in accordance with paragraphs 3.B. and 3.C. of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19, Revision D, dated February 16,
2018.
    (3) Accomplishing Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 1,
dated October 30, 2017; Issue 2, dated June 12, 2018; Issue 3, dated
June 21, 2018; or Issue 04, dated July 27, 2018, is an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) only for the replacement of the affected
single nut plate brackets and standoffs on the motive flow line and
vent line at LH and RH wing stations Yw  209.019 and Yw
 317.019 required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.
    (4) Accomplishing Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-28-018, Issue 1,
dated October 30, 2017; Issue 2, dated June 12, 2018; Issue 3, dated
June 21, 2018; or Issue 04, dated July 27, 2018, prior to the
effective date of this AD, along with the replacement of the

affected single nut plate brackets and standoffs on the motive flow
line, vent line, pressure relief line, and scavenge line at LH and
RH wing stations Yw  209.019, Yw  317.019,
and Yw  371.019, is an acceptable method of compliance
for the actions required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.
    (5) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4533
inclusive, on which Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19, dated
August 16, 2016; or Revision A, dated November 4, 2016, has been
done: Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect the motive flow
line and vent line at wing stations -371.019 and 371.019 in the LH
and RH fuel tanks, respectively, to ensure that these fuel tubes are
adequately supported, and inspect the fuel tubes to verify that an
appropriate clearance has been maintained between the fuel tubes and
their support brackets, in accordance with paragraph 3.B., step
(13), and paragraph 3.C., of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19,
Revision D, dated February 16, 2018.
    (6) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4572
inclusive: Within 8,000 flight hours or 48 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, install
TeflonTM sleeves on the vent line at wing stations Yw
 209.019 and Yw  371.019 in the LH and RH
fuel tanks, inspect the TeflonTM sleeve installation on
the vent line at wing stations Yw  317.019 in the LH and
RH fuel tanks, and if any sleeve is incorrectly installed,
reposition the TeflonTM sleeves before further flight, in
accordance with paragraphs 3.B. and 3.C. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-24, dated November
27, 2017.
    (7) Prior to accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph
(h)(6) of this AD, the applicable actions specified in paragraph
(h)(2) or (5) of this AD must be done. Accomplishment of Bombardier
Modification Summary (ModSum) 4Q113904 on an airplane prior to the
effective date of this AD is acceptable for compliance with this
paragraph.
    (8) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4575
inclusive: Within 8,000 flight hours or 48 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect the
TeflonTM sleeve installation on the vent line in the LH
and RH fuel tanks for correct installation and damage, and if the
sleeves are incorrectly installed or damage is found, before further
flight, replace and reposition the TeflonTM sleeves, as
applicable, in accordance with paragraphs 3.B. and 3.C. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-25,
dated November 27, 2017.
    (9) Prior to accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph
(h)(8) of this AD, the applicable actions specified in paragraph
(h)(2) or (5) of this AD must be done. Accomplishment of Bombardier
ModSum 4Q113904 on an airplane prior to the effective date of this
AD is acceptable for compliance with this paragraph.

(i) Verification and Rework for Existing Maintenance Program

    (1) For airplanes having S/N 4001 and 4003 through 4575
inclusive, on which the actions required by paragraph (h)(6) or (8)
of this AD have been done before the effective date of this AD, or
that have complied with paragraph (m)(4) of this AD: Within 60 days
after the effective date of this AD, review the airplane maintenance
records to confirm if any of the prohibited tasks (defined in
paragraph (g) of this AD) were accomplished during or after
compliance with paragraph (h)(6) or (8) of this AD or paragraph
(m)(4) of this AD.
    (i) If any of the prohibited tasks were accomplished during or
after compliance with paragraph (h)(6) or (m)(4) of this AD, or if
it cannot be conclusively confirmed that they were not accomplished
during or after compliance with paragraph (h)(6) or paragraph (m)(4)
of this AD: Within 8,000 flight hours or 48 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do the actions
required by paragraph (h)(6) of this AD and, as applicable, comply
with the requirements of paragraph (h)(7) of this AD.
    (ii) If any of the prohibited tasks were accomplished during or
after compliance with paragraph (h)(8) of this AD, or if it cannot
be conclusively confirmed that they were not accomplished during or
after compliance with paragraph (h)(8) of this AD: Within 8,000
flight hours or 48 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, do the actions required by paragraph (h)(8)
of this AD and, as applicable, comply with the requirements of
paragraph (h)(9) of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes having S/N 4573 and subsequent, with an
airplane date of manufacture, as identified on the identification
plate of the airplane, dated before the effective date of this AD:
Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, review the
airplane maintenance records to confirm if any of the prohibited
tasks (defined in paragraph (g) of this AD) were accomplished on or
after the airplane date of manufacture. If any of the prohibited
tasks were accomplished on or after the airplane date of
manufacture, or if it cannot be conclusively confirmed that they
were not accomplished on or after the airplane date of manufacture,
within 8,000 flight hours or 48 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first, obtain and follow instructions for
rework using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch,
FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or De Havilland
Aircraft of Canada Limited's TCCA Design Approval Organization
(DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-
authorized signature.

(j) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    For all airplanes: Within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD, revise the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate the information specified in (Bombardier)
Q400 Dash 8 Temporary Revision (TR) ALI-0192 and TR ALI-0193, both
dated April 24, 2018, into Section 4--28 Fuel System Limitation, or
Section 5--00 Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations, as
applicable, of Part 2, of the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance
Requirements Manual, PSM 1-84-7. The initial compliance time for
doing the tasks in (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 TR ALI-0192, dated April
24, 2018, is at the applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1) or
(2) of this AD, whichever occurs later:
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 18,000 total flight cycles or
within 108 months since issuance of the original airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness,
whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

(k) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, or Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless
the actions, intervals, and CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this
AD.

(l) Maintenance Task Prohibitions

    For all airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, comply
with the prohibitions specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (2) of this
AD.
    (1) It is prohibited to use the Bombardier airplane maintenance
manual (AMM) tasks identified in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) through (v) of
this AD, which are specified in the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 AMM, PSM
1-84-2, Revision 59 dated October 5, 2017, or earlier revisions of
these tasks. TRs including these AMM tasks, dated November 27, 2017,
or earlier, are also prohibited for use except as specified in
paragraph (l)(1)(i) through (v) of this AD.
    (i) Task 28-10-00-280-806 Detailed Inspection of the
TeflonTM Sleeve on the Fuel Tank Vent Line, LH and RH
(FSL#284000-406), with the exception of (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM
TR 28-145, dated November 21, 2017.
    (ii) Task 28-12-06-000-801 Removal of the Outboard Vent Line,
with the exception of (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-146, dated
November 21, 2017.
    (iii) Task 28-12-06-400-801 Installation of the Outboard Vent
Line, with the exception of (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-147,
dated November 21, 2017.
    (iv) Task 28-12-01-000-801 Removal of the Inboard Vent Line,
with the exception of (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-148, dated
November 24, 2017.
    (v) Task 28-12-01-400-801 Installation of the Inboard Vent Line,
with the exception of (Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 AMM TR 28-149, dated
November 27, 2017.
    (2) It is prohibited to use the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8
Maintenance Task Card Manual (MTCM) task cards identified in
paragraphs (l)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD that are specified in the
Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 MTCM, PSM 1-84-7TC, Revision 42 dated
November 5, 2017, or earlier revisions or amendments of these task
cards. MTCM task card revisions or amendments dated November 21,
2017, or earlier, are also prohibited for use, except as specified
in paragraphs (l)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD.

    (i) Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 MTCM Maintenance Task Card 000-28-
520-704 (Config A01), Detailed Inspection of the TeflonTM
Sleeve on the Fuel Tank Vent Line (LH), with the exception of
(Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 MTCM Maintenance Task Card 000-28-520-704
(Config A01), Detailed Inspection of the TeflonTM Sleeve
on the Fuel Tank Vent Line (LH), Revision 42, Amendment 0002, dated
November 21, 2017.
    (ii) Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 MTCM Maintenance Task Card 000-28-
620-704 (Config A01), Detailed Inspection of the TeflonTM
Sleeve on the Fuel Tank Vent Line (RH), with the exception of
(Bombardier) Q400 Dash 8 MTCM Maintenance Task Card 000-28-620-704
(Config A01), Detailed Inspection of the TeflonTM Sleeve
on the Fuel Tank Vent Line (RH), Revision 42, Amendment 0002, dated
November 21, 2017.

(m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-
28-18, dated April 20, 2016; or Revision A, dated November 14, 2016.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-
28-19, Revision B, dated July 28, 2017, or Revision C, dated
September 1, 2017.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (h) (5) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using paragraphs 3.A. and 3.C and
paragraph 3.B., step (13) of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-19,
Revision B, dated July 28, 2017, or Revision C, dated September 1,
2017
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (h)(6) of this AD, if, before the effective date of this
AD, the ModSums identified in paragraph (m)(4)(i), (ii), or (iii) of
this AD were incorporated, and provided the conditions identified in
figure 1 to paragraph (m)(4) of this AD have been met.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24MR22.057

    (i) Incorporation of both a modsum identified in paragraph
(m)(4)(i)(A) of this AD and a modsum identified in paragraph
(m)(4)(i) (B) of this AD.
    (A) One of the modsums identified in paragraphs (m)(4)(i)(A)(1)
through (9) of this AD.
    (1) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision A, dated February 7,
2017.
    (2) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision B, dated April 11,
2017.
    (3) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision C, dated August 30,
2017.
    (4) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision D, dated October 11,
2017.
    (5) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision E, dated October 19,
2017.
    (6) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision F, dated October 20,
2017.
    (7) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision G, dated November
24, 2017.
    (8) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision H, dated November
29, 2017.
    (9) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800023, Revision J, dated December
12, 2017.
    (B) One of the modsums identified in paragraphs (m)(4)(i)(B)(1)
through (5) of this AD.
    (1) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision A, dated October 20,
2017.
    (2) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision B, dated November 3,
2017.
    (3) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision C, dated November
21, 2017.
    (4) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision D, dated November
23, 2017.
    (5) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision E, dated November
29, 2017.
    (ii) Incorporation of both a modsum identified in paragraph
(m)(4)(ii)(A) of this AD and a modsum identified in paragraph
(m)(4)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800030, Revision A, dated November 3,
2017; or Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800030, Revision B, dated November
21, 2017.
    (B) One of the modsums identified in paragraphs (m)(4)(ii)(B)(1)
through (5) of this AD.
    (1) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision A, dated October 20,
2017.
    (2) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision B, dated November 3,
2017.
    (3) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision C, dated November
21, 2017.
    (4) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision D, dated November
23, 2017,
    (5) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800025, Revision E, dated November
29, 2017.
    (iii) Incorporation of a modsum identified in paragraphs
(m)(4)(iii)(A) through (C) of this AD.
    (A) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800027, Revision A, dated October 27,
2017.
    (B) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800027, Revision B, dated November 9,
2017.
    (C) Bombardier ModSum IS4Q2800027, Revision C, dated November
15, 2017.

(n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager,

Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-
7300. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's
TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the
approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2017-05R2, dated September 20, 2019, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2022-0287.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Joseph
Catanzaro, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA,
New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited, Q-Series Technical Help Desk,
123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone
416-375-4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet
https://dehavilland.com. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on March 15, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-05964 Filed 3-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 28077]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09952]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-497, OMB Control No. 3235-0555]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 6h-1

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
existing collection of information provided for in Rule 6h-1 (17 CFR
240.6h-1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') (15
U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Section 6(h) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78f(h)) requires national
securities exchanges and national securities associations that trade
security futures products to establish listing standards that, among
other things, require that: (i) Trading in such products not be readily
susceptible to price manipulation; and (ii) the market on which the
security futures product trades has in place procedures to coordinate
trading halts with the listing market for the security or securities
underlying the security futures product. Rule 6h-1 implements these
statutory requirements and requires that (1) the final settlement price
for each cash-settled security futures product fairly reflect the
opening price of the underlying security or securities, and (2) the
exchanges and associations trading security futures products halt
trading in any security futures product for as long as trading in the
underlying security for trading of a security futures product based on
a single security, or trading in 50% or more of the underlying
securities for trading of a security futures product based on a narrow-
based security index, is halted on the listing market.
    It is estimated that approximately 1 respondent will incur an
average burden of 10 hours per year to comply with this rule, for a
total burden of 10 hours. At an average internal cost per hour of
approximately $428, the resultant total internal cost of compliance for
the respondents is $4,280 per year (1 respondent x 10 hours/respondent
x $428/hour).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted by
July 11, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: May 4, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-09952 Filed 5-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 165 (Wednesday, August 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51850-51852]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21080]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75743; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-096]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Kill Switch for NOM

August 20, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 7, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 6, entitled
``Acceptance of Quotes and Orders,'' of the rules governing the NASDAQ
Options Market (``NOM'' or ``Exchange''). The Exchange proposes to
adopt an optional Kill Switch protection.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the filing is to adopt a new risk protection, a Kill
Switch, applicable to all NOM Participants. The Kill Switch will allow
NOM Participants to remove quotes and cancel open orders and prevent
new order submission. This feature provides firms with a powerful risk
management tool for immediate control of their quote and order
activity.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 6, entitled
``Acceptance of Quotes and Orders,'' to add new section (d) to adopt
the Kill Switch. The NASDAQ Options Kill Switch will be an optional
tool that enables Participants to initiate a message(s) \3\ to the
System to: (i) Promptly remove quotes; and/or (ii) promptly cancel
orders. Participants may submit a request to the System to remove/
cancel quotes and/or orders based on certain identifiers on either a
user or group level. Participants may elect to remove quotes and cancel
orders by Exchange account, port, and/or badge or mnemonic
(``Identifier'') or by a group (one or more Identifier
combinations),\4\ which are provided by such Participant to the
Exchange.\5\ Participants may not remove quotes/orders by symbol. The
System will send an automated message to the Participant when a Kill
Switch request has been processed by the Exchange's System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NOM Participants will be able to utilize an interface to
send a message to the Exchange to initiate the Kill Switch or they
may contact the Exchange directly.
    \4\ The type of group permissible would be within a broker-
dealer. For example, this could be including but not limited to all
market maker accounts or all order entry ports.
    \5\ Orders submitted by NOM Market Makers over Ouch to Trade
Options (OTTO) interface will be treated as quotes for purposes of
this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Participant selects quotes to be cancelled utilizing the
Kill Switch, the NOM Participant must send a message to the Exchange to
request the removal of all quotes requested for the certain specified
Identifier(s).\6\ The NOM Participant will be unable to enter any
additional quotes for the affected Identifier(s) until re-entry has
been enabled pursuant to proposed section (d)(iii).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See note 3.
    \7\ Sweeps will also be cancelled. A sweep is a one-sided
electronic quote submitted over the Specialized Quote Feed, which is
the market making quoting interface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Participant selects orders to be cancelled utilizing the
Kill Switch, the NOM Participant must send a message to the Exchange to
request the cancellation of all orders requested for the certain
specified Identifier(s).\8\ The NOM Participant will be unable to enter
additional orders for the affected Identifier(s) until re-entry has
been enabled pursuant to section (d)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed section (d)(iii) stipulates that after quotes and/or
orders are removed/cancelled by the NOM Participant utilizing the Kill
Switch, the NOM Participant will be unable to enter additional quotes
and/or orders for the affected Identifier(s) until the NOM Participant
has made a request to the Exchange and Exchange staff has set a re-
entry indicator to enable re-entry.\9\ Once enabled for re-entry, the
System will send a Re-entry Notification Message to the NOM
Participant. The applicable Clearing Participant for that NOM
Participant also will be notified of the re-entry into the System after
quotes and/or orders are removed/cancelled as a result of the Kill
Switch, provided the Clearing Participant has requested to receive such
notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The NOM Participant must directly and verbally contact the
Exchange to request the re-set.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers many risk mitigation and management tools today
including, but not limited to, certain rapid fire risk controls,\10\
15c3-5 risk controls, Order Price Protections,\11\ and cancel on
disconnect and purge functionality for Specialized Quote Feed (SQF),
Ouch to Trade Orders (OTTO) and FIX. The Kill Switch offers
Participants a means to control their exposure, through an interface
which is not dependent on the integrity of the Participant's own
systems, should the Participant experience a failure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See NOM Rules at Chapter VII, Section 6(f).
    \11\ See NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement this rule within ninety (90)
days of the implementation date. The Exchange will issue an Options
Trader Alert in advance to inform market participants of such date.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by enhancing the risk protections available

to Exchange members. The proposal promotes policy goals of the
Commission which has encouraged execution venues, exchange and non-
exchange alike, to enhance risk protection tools and other mechanisms
to decrease risk and increase stability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The individual firm benefits of enhanced risk protections flow
downstream to counter-parties both at the Exchange and at other options
exchanges, thereby increasing systemic protections as well.
Additionally, because the Exchange offers this risk tool to all NOM
Participants, the Exchange believes it will encourage liquidity
generally and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system and protect investors and
the public interest.
    This optional risk tool as noted above will be offered to all NOM
Participants. The Exchange further represents that its proposal will
operate consistently with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer
pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS and that the functionality is
not mandatory. Specifically, any interest that is executable against a
NOM Participant's quotes and orders that are received \14\ by the
Exchange prior to the time the Kill Switch is processed by the System
will automatically execute at the price up to the NOM Participant's
size. The Kill Switch message will be accepted by the System in the
order of receipt in the queue and will be processed in that order so
that interest that is already accepted into the System will be
processed prior to the Kill Switch message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The time of receipt for an order or quote is the time such
message is processed by the Exchange book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A NOM Market Makers' obligation to provide continuous two-sided
quotes on a daily basis is not diminished by the removal of such quotes
and/or orders by utilizing the Kill Switch. NOM Market Makers will be
required to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis. NOM
Market Makers that utilize the Kill Switch will not be relieved of the
obligation to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis, nor
will it prohibit the Exchange from taking disciplinary action against a
NOM Market Maker for failing to meet the continuous quoting obligation
each trading day.
    With respect to providing information regarding the removal of
quotes and/or cancellation of orders as a result of the Kill Switch to
the Clearing Participant, each Member that transacts through a Clearing
Member on the Exchange executes a Letter of Guarantee wherein the
Clearing Member accepts financial responsibility for all Exchange
transactions made by the NOM Participant on whose behalf the Clearing
Member submits the letter of guarantee. The Exchange believes that
because Clearing Members guarantee all transactions on behalf of a
Participant, and therefore bear the risk associated with those
transactions, it is appropriate for Clearing Members to have knowledge
of the utilization of the Kill Switch, should the Clearing Member
request such notification.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal does not impose an
undue burden on inter-market competition because all NOM Participants
may avail themselves of the Kill Switch, which functionality will be
optional. The proposed rule change is meant to protect NOM Participants
in the event the NOM Participant is suffering from a systems issue or
from the occurrence of unusual or unexpected market activity that would
require them to withdraw from the market in order to protect investors.
The ability to control risk at either the user or group level will
permit the NOM Participant to protect itself from inadvertent exposure
to excessive risk at the each level. Reducing such risk will enable NOM
Participants to enter quotes and orders without any fear of inadvertent
exposure to excessive risk, which in turn will benefit investors
through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such
increased liquidity benefits investors because they receive better
prices and because it lowers volatility in the options market. For
these reasons, the Exchange does not believe this proposal imposes an
undue burden on inter-market competition, rather the proposed rule
change will have no impact on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-096 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-096. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-096 and
should be submitted on or before September 16, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-21080 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53561-53563]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24829]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0093; Notice 1]

Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Inconsequentiality
and Decision Denying Request for Deferral of Determination

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

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition; notice of receipt of request for
deferral, and of decision denying request for deferral.

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

SUMMARY: On July 10, 2017, Takata Corporation (``Takata'') filed a
defect information report (``DIR'') in which it determined that a
safety-related defect exists in certain phase-stabilized ammonium
nitrate (``PSAN'') driver-side airbag inflators that it manufactured
with a calcium sulfate desiccant, including inflators that it supplied
to Ford Motor Company (``Ford''), Mazda North American Operations
(``Mazda''), and Nissan North America Inc. (``Nissan'') for use in
certain vehicles. Ford has petitioned the Agency for a decision that,
because analysis of inflators installed in certain Ford vehicles does
not demonstrate propellant-tablet density degradation or increased
inflation pressure, and because there are design differences between
the inflators installed in Ford vehicles and an inflator variant
installed in Nissan vehicles, the equipment defect determined to exist
by Takata is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety in
the Ford vehicles affected by Takata's DIR. Ford requests relief from
its notification and remedy obligations under the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 and its applicable regulations, and
further requests that the Agency allow Ford until March 31, 2018 to
complete certain analysis and testing before the Agency decides on the
petition.

DATES: The closing date for comments is December 18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments regarding this petition for inconsequentiality.
Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title
of this notice and be submitted by one of the following methods:
     Internet: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may call the Docket at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Note that all comments received will be posted without change to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Thus, submitting such information makes it public. You may
wish to read the Privacy Act notice, which can be viewed by clicking on
the ``Privacy and Security Notice'' link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov. DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available
for review in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will
be filed in the docket and will be considered. Comments and supporting
materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For legal issues: Stephen Hench,
Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-100, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
(telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    For general information regarding NHTSA's investigation into Takata
airbag inflator ruptures and the related recalls, visit https://www.nhtsa.gov/recall-spotlight/takata-air-bags.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On November 3, 2015, NHTSA issued, and Takata agreed to, a Consent
Order setting forth penalties, requirements, and performance
obligations in connection with Takata's alleged failure to fully comply
with the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 as
amended and recodified (the ``Safety Act''), 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq.,
and its applicable regulations. Under the Consent Order, Takata is
required to

test its phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate (``PSAN'') inflators that
contain a desiccant (a drying agent) in cooperation with vehicle
manufacturers ``to determine the service life and safety of such
inflators and to determine whether, and to what extent, these inflator
types suffer from a defect condition, regardless of whether it is the
same or similar to the conditions at issue'' in the Defect Information
Reports (``DIRs'') Takata had filed for its non-desiccated PSAN
inflators. Consent Order ] 28.
    In February 2016, NHTSA requested Ford's assistance in evaluating
Takata calcium-sulfate desiccated PSDI-5 driver-side airbag inflators,
to which Ford agreed. In June 2016, Ford and Takata began a field-
recovery program to evaluate Takata calcium-sulfate desiccated PSDI-5
driver-side airbag inflators that were original equipment in MY 2007-
2008 Ford Ranger vehicles in Florida, Michigan, and Arizona. See also
Recall No. 17E-034.\1\ Nissan also initiated a similar field-recovery
program for its Versa vehicles in March 2016. Recall No. 17V-449. By
January 2017, a very limited number of samples from Ford were available
and tested. Recall No. 17E-034. In March 2017, Takata and Ford met to
review the field data collected from the inflators returned by Ford and
Nissan. Recall No. 17E-034. Between March and June 2017, additional
Ford inflators were subjected to live dissection, which included
chemical and dimensional propellant analyses, and ballistic testing.
Recall No. 17E-034. Also in June, Takata reviewed with Ford and NHTSA
field-return data from Ford inflators. Recall No. 17E-034. Ford then
met with NHTSA on July 6, 2017 to discuss the data collected to date,
as well as an expansion plan for evaluating Takata calcium-sulfate
desiccated PSDI-5 driver-side airbag inflators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Later, under Paragraph 43 of the Third Amendment to the
Coordinated Remedy Order (``ACRO''), NHTSA ordered each vehicle
manufacturer ``with any vehicle in its fleet equipped with a
desiccated PSAN Takata inflator'' (and not using or planning to use
such an inflator as a final remedy) to develop a written plan
describing ``plans to confirm the safety and/or service life'' of
desiccated PSAN Takata inflators used in its fleet. ACRO ] 43. Such
plans were to include coordination with Takata for parts recovery
from fleet vehicles, testing, and anticipated/future plans ``to
develop or expand recovery and testing protocols of the desiccated
PSAN inflators.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Takata has analyzed over 400 such inflators from the Ford program--
as well as 895 such inflators from the Nissan program. See Recall No.
17V-449. After a review of field-return data, on July 10, 2017, Takata,
determining a safety-related defect exists, filed a DIR for calcium-
sulfate desiccated PSDI-5 driver-side airbag inflators that were
produced from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2012 and installed as
original equipment on certain motor vehicles manufactured by Ford (the
``covered Ford inflators''), as well as calcium-sulfate desiccated
PSDI-5 driver-side airbag inflators for those same years of production
installed as original equipment on motor vehicles manufactured by
Nissan (the ``covered Nissan inflators'') and Mazda (the ``covered
Mazda inflators'') (collectively, the ``covered inflators''). Recall
No. 17E-034.
    Takata's DIR filing triggered Ford's obligation to file a DIR for
its affected vehicles. See 49 CFR part 573; November 3, 2015
Coordinated Remedy Order ]] 45-46.\2\ Ford filed a corresponding DIR,
informing NHTSA it intended to file a petition for inconsequentiality.
Ford Petition for a Determination of Inconsequentiality and Request for
Deferral of Determination Regarding Certain Ford Vehicles Equipped with
Takata PSDI-5 Desiccated Driver Airbag Inflators (August 16, 2017)
(``Petition'') (cover letter). Ford then petitioned the Agency, under
49 U.S.C. 30118(d), 30120(h), and 49 CFR part 556, for a decision that,
because Takata's analysis of the covered Ford inflators does not show
propellant tablet-density degradation, or increased inflation pressure,
and certain inflator design differences exist between the covered Ford
inflators and the covered Nissan inflators, the equipment defect
determined to exist by Takata is inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety in the Ford vehicles affected by Takata's DIR. Id. at 1,
11-16.\3\ In addition, citing its commitment to further investigation,
Ford stated it is expanding its acquisition, testing and analysis of
the covered Ford inflators, and requested the Agency allow Ford until
March 31, 2018 to complete certain testing and analysis before deciding
on the Petition. Id. at 16-20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Under 49 CFR 573.5(a), a vehicle manufacturer is responsible
for any safety-related defect determined to exist in any item of
original equipment. See also 49 U.S.C. 30102(b)(1)(C).
    \3\ Ford also suggests differences in ``vehicle environment,''
between affected Ford and Nissan vehicles as a potential explanation
for inflator degradation-risk differences between the covered Ford
inflators and the covered Nissan inflators. See Petition at 2.
However, Ford does not elaborate on this suggestion elsewhere in its
Petition. See id. at 14-16 (focusing on design differences between
the covered Ford inflators and covered Nissan inflators).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Classes of Motor Vehicles Involved

    Ford's Petition involves approximately 3.04 million light vehicles
that contain the covered Ford inflators. These vehicles are:

 Ford Ranger (MY 2007-2011)
 Ford Fusion (MY 2006-2012)
 Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ (MY 2006-2012)
 Mercury Milan (MY 2006-2011)
 Ford Edge (MY 2007-2010)
 Lincoln MKX (MY 2007-2010)

Id. (cover letter).

III. Summary of Ford's Petition

    Ford argues that Takata's DIR does not determine the covered Ford
inflators ``actually contain a defect at this time, or that they will
develop one over time,'' and that once Ford completes its engineering
analysis (by the end of March 2018), it will be able to supplement or
amend its Petition to ``allow the Agency to make a determination'' on
its Petition. See id. at 10, 19. In the interim, Ford states that it
will continue to obtain permanent replacement driver-side airbag
inflators so that its continuing analysis will not affect the
availability of parts if a remedy is needed. Id.
    Ford's position that the defect is inconsequential rests on two
related arguments. First, in contrast to testing data pertaining to the
covered Nissan inflators, Ford contends Takata's analysis of the
covered Ford inflators does not show propellant-tablet density
degradation or increased inflation pressure. Id. at 11. Takata has
analyzed over 1,300 of its calcium-sulfate desiccated PSDI-5 driver-
side airbag inflators, which include approximately 423 inflators from
Ford Ranger vehicles \4\ and 895 inflators from Nissan Versa
vehicles.\5\ Such analysis involved both live inflator dissections and
ballistic testing. Id. Ford asserts that about 360 live dissections of
inflators obtained as part of Ford's field-recovery program demonstrate
``consistent inflator output performance''--specifically, measurements
of ignition-tablet discoloration, generate density, and moisture
content of certain inflator constituents did not indicate a reduction-
in-density trend. Id. at 11-12. Ford further contends that these
observations are supported by 47 ballistic deployment tests that showed
no inflator exceeding the production primary-chamber pressure
specifications. Id. at 12-13. Ford also emphasizes that Takata has not
observed pressure vessel ruptures or

pressure excursions on any desiccated PSDI-5 inflator, and that ``[t]he
maximum primary chamber pressure that Takata measured'' in covered Ford
inflators was about 15 MPa lower than that measured in a covered Nissan
inflator (which exhibited primary chamber pressure exceeding 60 MPa).
Id. at 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Twenty of these inflators were from salvage yards, however,
``where the conditions used to store the parts cannot be
determined.'' Id. at 11.
    \5\ In its DIR, Nissan provides this 895 figure; in its
Petition, Ford attributes ``approximately 1,000'' covered inflators
to Nissan's program. Compare Recall No. 17V-449 with Petition at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, and relatedly, Ford contends ``[t]here are design
differences'' in the covered Ford inflators when compared to the
covered Nissan inflators, and that such differences may explain
differences observed between the two inflator variants during testing.
Id. In short, Ford cites its inflator variant as having ``fewer
potential moisture sources'' because the inflators contain only two,
foil-wrapped auto-ignition tablets (instead of three that are not foil-
wrapped), contain divider disk foil tape, and utilize certain EPDM
generate cushion material (instead of ceramic) that ``reduces generate
movement over time, maintains generate integrity, and leads to
consistent and predictable burn rates.'' Id. at 15-16 (providing
table).
    The remainder of Ford's Petition explains its ``commit[ment] to
further investigation of PSDI-5 airbag inflators.'' See id. at 16-18.
Because of this stated concern, including about data pertaining to the
covered Nissan inflators, ``Ford is expanding the scope of the sampling
and is involving leading industry experts to assess any potential risks
from desiccated PSDI-5 inflators in Ford products.'' Id. at 16. Ford
outlines a two-pronged plan for this expansion. First, Ford describes a
parts-acquisition program ``to gather approximately 6,000 desiccated
PSDI-5 driver airbag inflators'' from certain model year vehicles in
areas with high absolute humidity for what appears to be all vehicle
lines in which the covered inflators were originally installed.\6\ Id.
at 17. And second, Ford describes a continuation of inflator testing
and engineering analysis, which will engage third-party experts for
independent assessments. Id. at 17-18. The testing will include various
engineering analyses (comparisons of design within the PSDI-5 family,
statistical assessments, and ballistic modeling), inflator testing (CT
scanning and inflator disassembly), and propellant testing (moisture
content, closed-bomb burn rate, X-ray micro-computer tomography,
thermogravimetric/differential scanning calorimetry analysis). Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Ford's Petition explicitly lists six vehicle lines,
comprising all affected Ford models except for the Fusion. See
Petition at 17. However, one of the six vehicle lines is simply
listed as ``2006-2007 MY Ford.'' Presumably, this refers to certain
MY Ford Fusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Request for Deferral of Determination

    Ford has requested that NHTSA allow it additional time before
deciding on its Petition--specifically, until March 31, 2018--so that
it may ``complete its intensified and expanded inflator field study,
aging assessment, and testing on additional samples and vehicle types
to evaluate the performance of the Takata desiccated PSDI-5 driver
airbag inflators.'' Id. at 19. In making this request, Ford appears to
acknowledge the available data may not yet be sufficient for the Agency
to grant its Petition. Indeed, Ford notes that while its results to
date are ``good news for the safety'' of users of one of its six
affected vehicle models--the Ranger--``the results on the Nissan design
inflators are of concern.'' Id.
    The Agency recognizes Ford's plans to expand its investigation and
to secure a supply of remedy inflators for affected vehicles if it
becomes needed. See id. at 3, 10. However, 49 CFR 556.4(b)(5) provides
that an inconsequentiality petition must set forth all data, views, and
arguments supporting that petition, and Ford does not adequately
justify why this provision does not preclude deferral here.
    Specifically, NHTSA does not find Ford's request for deferral
reasonable under the circumstances or supported by the testing and data
it has collected to date. Indeed, Ford does not provide an explanation
for why it has not already undertaken the expansive investigation it
now proposes, and Ford's past efforts to evaluate the safety of the
covered inflators do not support granting a deferral. NHTSA requested
Ford's assistance in evaluating Takata calcium-sulfate desiccated PSDI-
5 driver-side airbag inflators in February 2016, and over seventeen
months later only about 400 covered Ford inflators have been tested.
Further, while the covered Ford inflators were original equipment in
six vehicle models (Ranger, Fusion, MKZ, Milan, Edge, and MKX), all
approximately 400 inflators harvested in Ford's field-recovery program
were from the same vehicle model (the Ranger). Moreover, the number of
inflators tested under Ford's program was less than half the number
tested under Nissan's program, and about seven percent of the
approximately 6,000 inflators Ford now proposes to test in only about
seven months.
    It is difficult to reconcile Ford's ambitious plan with its prior
approach toward evaluating the safety of the covered inflators. Ford
has provided no compelling argument for the Agency to deviate from 49
CFR 556.4(b)(5).
    For these reasons, NHTSA denies Ford's request for a deferral of
the NHTSA's decision on Ford's Petition. The Agency will decide on
Ford's Petition without consideration of Ford's planned additional
efforts as outlined in its Petition. Nevertheless, NHTSA recognizes
Ford's plans to further evaluate the safety of Takata calcium-sulfate
desiccated PSDI-5 driver-side airbag inflators, and encourages Ford to
move forward with those plans as described in its Petition--
particularly given the concern about these inflators that Ford has
expressed.
    Accordingly, NHTSA hereby gives notice of its receipt of Ford's
Petition for a Determination of Inconsequentiality and Request for
Deferral of Determination Regarding Certain Ford Vehicles Equipped with
Takata PSDI-5 Desiccated Driver Airbag Inflators. And it is hereby
Ordered that:
    1. The period for public comment on Ford's Petition shall run from
the publication of this decision through December 18, 2017; and
    2. Ford's request for a deferral of NHTSA's decision on Ford's
Petition, so that Ford may complete its intensified and expanded
inflator field study, aging assessment, and testing on additional
samples and vehicle types, is Denied.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq., 30118, 30120(h), 30162,
30166(b)(1), 30166(g)(1); delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95(a);
49 CFR parts 556, 573, 577.

    Issued: November 9, 2017.
Stephen P. Wood,
Acting Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2017-24829 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 81 (Monday, April 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 23348]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09588]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER14-1747-000]

Inertia Power II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Inertia Power II, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is May 12, 2014.
    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
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding 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 email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 22, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-09588 Filed 4-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P