[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 217 (Thursday, November 8, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55833-55837]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0957; Product Identifier 2018-NM-102-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-
111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; and Model
A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracks that were found after
improperly performed magnetic particle inspections of the main landing
gear (MLG) sliding tubes were done. This proposed AD would require
instructions for repetitive general visual inspections of the affected
parts for cracks and replacement if necessary. We are proposing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 24,
2018.

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 http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: 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 Airbus,
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0957; 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, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0957;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-102-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2018-0136, dated June 26, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -
122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and
-133 airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -
233 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During a walk-around inspection, prior to aeroplane dispatch, an
A320 MLG was found collapsed. Investigation revealed that, following
a magnetic particle inspection of the MLG sliding tube, performed
improperly during overhaul, cracks were initiated, eventually
leading to fatigue fracture. A limited number of MLG sliding tubes
have been identified that may have been subject to the same improper
inspection during the last overhaul.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to MLG
sliding tube fracture, possibly resulting in MLG collapse, damage to
the aeroplane, and injury to occupants.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the SB
[Service Bulletin A320-32-1461], providing instructions for
repetitive general visual inspections (GVI) of the affected parts
until next overhaul.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive GVI of the affected parts [for cracks] and, depending on
findings, replacement.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0957.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11,
2018. This service information describes procedures for repetitive
general visual inspections of MLG sliding tubes for cracks and
replacement of affected sliding tubes. 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 our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all 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 Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 817 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate 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 2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170              $0  Up to $170................  Up to $138,890.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be
$9,945, or $85 per product.
    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition
actions that would be required based on the results of any required
actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
19 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,615.            $185           $1,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be
$85 per product.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this NPRM is 2120-
0056.

The paperwork cost associated with this NPRM has been detailed in the
Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this NPRM is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

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 (AD):

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2018-0957; Product Identifier 2018-NM-
102-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 24, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -
122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -
232, and -233 airplanes, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
Gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks that were found after
improperly performed magnetic particle inspections of the main
landing gear (MLG) sliding tubes were done. We are issuing this AD
to address this condition, which could result in fracture of the MLG
sliding tube, possibly resulting in MLG collapse, damage to the
airplane, and injury to occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definitions

    For the purposes of this AD, the definitions specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD apply.
    (1) An affected part is any MLG sliding tube, having a part
number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) listed in Figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, that has been last overhauled between October 27,
2003, and September 21, 2009, inclusive.

 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08NO18.011

 BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (2) Group 1 airplanes are those that have an affected part
installed. Group 2 airplanes are those that do not have an affected
part installed.

(h) Repetitive Inspections

    For Group 1 airplanes: Within 500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, and, thereafter, at intervals not to
exceed 500 flight cycles, accomplish a general visual inspection for
cracks of each affected part, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April
11, 2018.

(i) Corrective Action

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD: Before further flight, replace the
affected part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11, 2018.

(j) Terminating Action for Certain Actions Required by Paragraph (h) of
This AD

    Accomplishment of an overhaul of an affected part after
September 21, 2009, constitutes terminating action for the
repetitive general visual inspections required by paragraph (h) of
this AD for that affected part.

(k) Reporting

    Submit a report of findings (both positive and negative) of the
inspections specified in paragraph (h) of this AD to Airbus, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April
11, 2018, at the applicable time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or
(k)(2) of this AD. If operators have reported findings as part of
obtaining any corrective actions approved by Airbus SAS's European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Design Organization Approval (DOA),
operators are not required to report those findings as specified in
this paragraph.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(l) Exception to Paragraphs (h) and (i) of This AD

    An airplane embodying Airbus Modification 161202 (Evolution (EV)
MLG) is not affected by the requirements of paragraphs (h) and (i)
of this AD, provided it is determined that no affected parts are
installed on that airplane. A review of airplane delivery and/or
maintenance records is acceptable to make this determination,
provided those records can be relied upon for that purpose and the
part number and serial

number of the MLG sliding tube can be positively identified from
that review.

(m) Parts Installation

    (1) For Group 1 airplanes: From the effective date of this AD,
it is allowed to install on any airplane an affected part, or an MLG
equipped with an affected part, provided that, within the last 500
flight cycles before installation, the part passed an inspection
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, and that, following
installation, the part is inspected as required by this AD.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes: From the effective date of this AD,
do not install on any airplane an affected part.

(n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (o)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by The Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.
    (4) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES 200.

(o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0136, dated June 26, 2018, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0957.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 26, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-24390 Filed 11-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 24, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51908-51909]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0195]

Special Local Regulation; Marine Events Within the Eleventh Coast
Guard District--Swim for Special Operations Forces

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation on
the waters of San Diego Bay, CA, during the Swim for Special Operations
Forces on September 17, 2022. This special local regulation is
necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, sponsor
vessels of the event, and general users of the waterway. During the
enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from entering
into, transiting through, or anchoring within this regulated area
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 for the location described in
Item 16 in table 1 to Sec.  100.1101, will be enforced from 7:30 a.m.
until 11:30 a.m. on September 17, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade
Shera Kim, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special
local regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 for the location identified in
Item No. 16 in table 1 to Sec.  100.1101, from 7:30 a.m. until 11:30
a.m. on September 17, 2022, for the Swim for Special Operations Forces
in San Diego Bay, CA. This action is being taken to provide for the
safety of life on the navigable waterways during the event. Our
regulation for recurring marine events in the San Diego Captain of the
Port Zone, Sec.  100.1101, Item No. 16 in table 1 to Sec.  100.1101,
specifies the location of the regulated area for the Swim for Special

Operations Forces, which encompasses portions of San Diego Bay. Under
the provisions of Sec.  100.1101, persons and vessels are prohibited
from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his
designated representative. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other
Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this
regulation.
    In addition to this document in the Federal Register, the Coast
Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of
this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.

    Dated: August 18, 2022.
J.W. Spitler,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2022-18197 Filed 8-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 39678]
[DOCID:fr13jy06-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-401-000]

Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

June 27, 2006.
    Take notice that on June 22, 2006, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC
(Texas Gas) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective
August 1, 2006:

Second Revised Sheet No. 279.
Second Revised Sheet No. 280.
First Revised Sheet No. 282.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10992 Filed 7-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 48 (Monday, March 15, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14231-14232]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05290]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0404; Special Conditions No. 25-783-SC]

Special Conditions: B/E Aerospace, Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16
(604 Variant) Airplane; Seats With Pretensioner Restraint Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc.
(Bombardier) Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplane. This airplane,
as modified by B/E Aerospace, will have a novel or unusual design
feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the
airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. This design
feature is seats with a 3-point shoulder harness incorporating a
pretensioner restraint system. The applicable airworthiness regulations
do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: Effective on B/E Aerospace on March 15, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Lennon, Human-Machine
Interface Section, AIR-626, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy
and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines,
Washington 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 7, 2019, B/E Aerospace applied for a supplemental type
certificate for seats with 3-point harness and pretensioner restraint
systems on Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplanes. The
604 variant is a derivative of the Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16
airplane currently approved under Type Certificate No. A21EA. This
airplane variant is a twin-engine, transport category airplane with
seating for 22 passengers, including crew, and a maximum take-off
weight of 47,600 pounds.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, B/E Aerospace must show that the Bombardier Model CL-600-
2B16 (604 variant) airplane, as changed, continues to meet the
applicable provisions of the regulations listed in Type Certificate No.
A21EA or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of
application for the change, except for earlier amendments as agreed
upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (e.g., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604
variant) airplane because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type
certificate to modify any other model included on the same type
certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature,
these special conditions would also apply to the other model under
Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplane
must comply with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14
CFR part 34, and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part
36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplane, as
modified by B/E Aerospace, will incorporate the following novel or
unusual design feature:
    Seats with a 3-point shoulder harness incorporating a pretensioner
restraint system to prevent head injuries.

Discussion

    B/E Aerospace has developed a system in which a pretensioning
automotive retractor eliminates slack in the 3-point shoulder harness,
pulling the occupant back into the seat prior to impact. This has the
effect of reducing forward translation of the occupant (reduced head
arc), while reducing the loads in the shoulder harness. B/E Aerospace
will install, in Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplanes,
seats that incorporate a 3-point harness and pretensioner restraint
system to protect seat occupants from head injuries.
    Over the past 10 years, multiple sensor-driven systems have been
installed in various airplanes to meet improved crashworthiness
regulations. A sensor-driven system is defined as any system that
activates due to a signal sent by an impact-triggered inertial sensor.
These types of systems include a lap-belt airbag, a structure-mounted
airbag, and a 3-point harness and pretensioner restraint system.
    Shoulder harnesses have been widely used on flight-attendant seats,
flight-deck seats, in business jets, and in general-aviation airplanes
to reduce occupant head injury in the unlikely event of an emergency
landing. Special conditions, pertinent regulations, and guidance have
been published, relating to other or existing restraint systems.
However, the use of a pretensioner restraint system with a 3-point
harness on transport airplane seats is a novel design.
    Pretensioner technology involves a step change in loading
experienced by the occupant for impacts below and above that at which
the device activates, because the upper torso excursion would be
interrupted by activation of the shoulder harness. This could result in
the head-injury criteria being higher at an intermediate impact
condition than that resulting from the maximum impact condition
corresponding to the test conditions specified in Sec.  25.562.
    The ideal triangular maximum-severity pulse is defined in Advisory
Circular 25.562-1B, ``Dynamic Evaluation of Seat Restraint Systems and
Occupant Protection on Transport Airplanes with Change 1,'' dated
January 10, 2006. For evaluating and testing less-severe pulses to
assess the effectiveness of the pretensioner setting, a similar
triangular pulse should be used with acceleration, rise time, and
velocity change scaled accordingly. The magnitude of the required pulse
should not deviate below the ideal pulse by more than 0.5g until 1.33
t1 is reached, where t1 represents the time
interval between 0 and t1 on the referenced pulse shape as
shown in AC 25.562-1B. This is an acceptable method of compliance to
the test requirements of these special conditions.
    Additionally, the pretensioner might not provide protection, after
actuation,

during secondary impacts. Therefore, the case where a small impact is
followed by a large impact should be addressed. If the minimum
deceleration severity at which the pretensioner is set to activate is
unnecessarily low, the protection offered by the pretensioner may be
lost by the time a second larger impact occurs.
    The existing regulations do not adequately address seats with
pretensioner restraint systems. Therefore, the proposed configuration
requires special conditions.
    Special conditions 1 through 5 address ensuring that the
pretensioner system activates when intended, to provide the necessary
protection of occupants. This includes protection of a range of
occupants under various accident conditions. Special conditions 6
through 11 address maintenance and reliability of the pretensioner
system, including any outside influences on the mechanism, to ensure it
functions as intended.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Discussion of Comments

    The FAA issued Notice of Proposed Special Conditions No. 25-20-04-
SC for the Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplane, which
was published in the Federal Register on September 4, 2020 (85 FR
55198). The FAA received responses from four commenters supporting the
special conditions. The special conditions are adopted as proposed.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604 variant) airplane. Should B/E
Aerospace apply at a later date for a supplemental type certificate to
modify any other model included on Type Certificate No. A21EA to
incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, these special
conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design feature
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability
and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of
these features on the airplane.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Bombardier Model CL-600-2B16 (604
variant), as modified by B/E Aerospace.
    In addition to the requirements of Sec.  25.562, forward-facing
passenger seats incorporating pretensioner restraint systems must meet
the following:
    1. Head Injury Criteria--The Head Injury Criteria value must not
exceed 1,000 units at any condition at which the pretensioner does or
does not deploy, up to the maximum severity pulse that corresponds to
the test conditions specified in Sec.  25.562. Tests must be performed
to demonstrate this, taking into account any necessary tolerances for
deployment.
    2. Protection during Secondary Impacts--The pretensioner activation
setting must be demonstrated to maximize the probability of the
protection being available when needed, considering secondary impacts.
    3. Protection of Occupants Other than 50th Percentile--Protection
of occupants for a range of stature from a 2-year-old child to a 95th
percentile male must be shown. For shoulder harnesses that include
pretensioners, protection of occupants other than a 50th percentile
male may be shown by test or analysis. In addition, the pretensioner
must not introduce a hazard to passengers due to the following seating
configurations:
    a. The seat occupant is holding an infant.
    b. The seat occupant is a child in a child restraint device.
    c. The seat occupant is a pregnant woman.
    4. Occupants Adopting the Brace Position--Occupants in the
traditional brace position when the pretensioner activates must not
experience adverse effects from the pretensioner activation.
    5. Inadvertent Pretensioner Actuation
    a. The probability of inadvertent pretensioner actuation must be
shown to be extremely remote (i.e., average probability per flight hour
of less than 10-7).
    b. The system must be shown not susceptible to inadvertent
pretensioner actuation as a result of wear and tear, or inertia loads
resulting from in-flight or ground maneuvers likely to be experienced
in service.
    c. The seated occupant must not be seriously injured as a result of
inadvertent pretensioner actuation.
    d. Inadvertent pretensioner activation must not cause a hazard to
the airplane nor cause serious injury to anyone who may be positioned
close to the retractor or belt (e.g., seated in an adjacent seat or
standing adjacent to the seat).
    6. Availability of the Pretensioner Function Prior to Flight--The
design must provide means for a crewmember to verify the availability
of the pretensioner function prior to each flight, or the probability
of failure of the pretensioner function must be demonstrated to be
extremely remote (i.e., average probability per flight hour of less
than 10-7) between inspection intervals.
    7. Incorrect Seatbelt Orientation--The system design must ensure
that any incorrect orientation (twisting) of the seatbelt does not
compromise the pretensioner protection function.
    8. Contamination Protection--The pretensioner mechanisms and
controls must be protected from external contamination associated with
that which could occur on or around passenger seating.
    9. Prevention of Hazards--The pretensioner system must not induce a
hazard to passengers in case of fire, nor create a fire hazard if
activated.
    10. Functionality after Loss of Power--The system must function
properly after loss of normal airplane electrical power, and after a
transverse separation in the fuselage at the most critical location. A
separation at the location of the system does not have to be
considered.
    11. High-intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) and Lightning
Protection--For airplanes that do not already incorporate 14 CFR
25.1316 and 25.1317 into their certification basis, the equipment must
meet the applicable requirements of Sec. Sec.  25.1316 and 25.1317.
Electrostatic discharge must also be considered in the design and
testing of the equipment.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 17, 2021.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-05290 Filed 3-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 213)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 64668-64674]
[DOCID:fr03no06-17]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0159; FRL-8239-6]
RIN 2060-AN81

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Allocation of Essential Use
Allowances for Calendar Year 2007

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to allocate essential use allowances for
import and production of class I stratospheric ozone depleting
substances (ODSs) for calendar year 2007. Essential use allowances
enable a person to obtain controlled class I ODSs as part of an
exemption to the regulatory ban on the production and import of these
chemicals, which became effective as of January 1, 1996. EPA allocates
essential use allowances for exempted production or import of a
specific quantity of class I ODSs solely for the designated essential
purpose. The proposed allocations total 125.3 metric tons (MT) of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) for use in metered dose inhalers (MDIs) for
2007.

DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received by the
EPA Docket on or before December 4, 2006, unless a public hearing is
requested. Comments must then be received on or before 30 days
following the public hearing. Any party requesting a public hearing
must notify the contact listed below under ``For Further Information
Contact'' by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on November 7, 2006. If a
hearing is held, it will take place on November 20, 2006 at EPA
headquarters in Washington, DC. EPA will post a notice on our Web site
(http://www.epa.gov/ozone) announcing further information on the

hearing if it is requested.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0159, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, attn: Kirsten M. Cappel.
     Mail: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: EPA
Air Docket, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108, Mail
Code 6102T, Washington, DC 20460. 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-HQ-OAR-
2006-0159. 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. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA

West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirsten M. Cappel, by regular mail:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division
(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; by
courier service or overnight express: 1301 L Street, NW., Room 827J,
Washington, DC 20005, by telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or by e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. What should I consider when preparing my comments?
II. Basis for Allocating Essential Use Allowances
    A. What are essential use allowances?
    B. Under what authority does EPA allocate essential use
allowances?
    C. What is the process for allocating essential use allowances?
III. Essential Use Allowances for Medical Devices
IV. Proposed Allocation of Essential Use Allowances for Calendar
Year 2007
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. General Information

A. What should I consider when preparing my comments?

    1. Confidential Business Information. Do not submit this
information to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark

the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.

     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Basis for Allocating Essential Use Allowances

A. What are essential use allowances?

    Essential use allowances are allowances to produce or import
certain ODSs in the U.S. for purposes that have been deemed
``essential'' by the U.S. Government and by the Parties to the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal
Protocol).
    The Montreal Protocol is the international agreement aimed at
reducing and eliminating the production and consumption \1\ of ODSs.
The elimination of production and consumption of class I ODSs is
accomplished through adherence to phaseout schedules for specific class
I ODSs,\2\ which include CFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl
chloroform. As of January 1, 1996, production and import of most class
I ODSs were phased out in developed countries, including the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Consumption'' is defined as the amount of a substance
produced in the United States, plus the amount imported into the
United States, minus the amount exported to Parties to the Montreal
Protocol (see Section 601(6) of the Clean Air Act).
    \2\ Class I ozone depleting substances are listed at 40 CFR Part
82, subpart A, appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act (Act) provide
exemptions that allow for the continued import and/or production of
class I ODSs for specific uses. Under the Montreal Protocol, exemptions
may be granted for uses that are determined by the Parties to be
``essential.'' Decision IV/25, taken by the Parties to the Protocol in
1992, established criteria for determining whether a specific use
should be approved as essential, and set forth the international
process for making determinations of essentiality. The criteria for an
essential use, as set forth in paragraph 1 of Decision IV/25, are the
following:

    (a) That a use of a controlled substance should qualify as
``essential'' only if:
    (i) It is necessary for the health, safety or is critical for
the functioning of society (encompassing cultural and intellectual
aspects); and
    (ii) there are no available technically and economically
feasible alternatives or substitutes that are acceptable from the
standpoint of environment and health;
    (b) that production and consumption, if any, of a controlled
substance for essential uses should be permitted only if:
    (i) all economically feasible steps have been taken to minimize
the essential use and any associated emission of the controlled
substance; and
    (ii) the controlled substance is not available in sufficient
quantity and quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled
controlled substances, also bearing in mind the developing
countries' need for controlled substances.

B. Under what authority does EPA allocate essential use allowances?

    Title VI of the Act implements the Montreal Protocol for the United
States.\3\ Section 604(d) of the Act authorizes EPA to allow the
production of limited quantities of class I ODSs after the phase out
date for the following essential uses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Section 614(b) of the Act. EPA's regulations
implementing the essential use provisions of the Act and the
Protocol are located in 40 CFR part 82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Methyl Chloroform, ``solely for use in essential applications
(such as nondestructive testing for metal fatigue and corrosion of
existing airplane engines and airplane parts susceptible to metal
fatigue) for which no safe and effective substitute is available.''
Under section 604(d)(1) of the Act, this exemption was available only
until January 1, 2005. Prior to that date, EPA issued methyl chloroform
allowances to the U.S. Space Shuttle and Titan Rocket programs.
    (2) Medical Devices (as defined in section 601(8) of the Act), ``if
such authorization is determined by the Commissioner [of the Food and
Drug Administration], in consultation with the Administrator [of EPA]
to be necessary for use in medical devices.'' EPA issues allowances to
manufacturers of MDIs that use CFCs as propellant for the treatment of
asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases.
    (3) Aviation Safety, for which limited quantities of halon-1211,
halon-1301, and halon-2402 may be produced ``if the Administrator of
the Federal Aviation. Administration, in consultation with the
Administrator [of EPA] determines that no safe and effective substitute
has been developed and that such authorization is necessary for
aviation safety purposes.'' Neither EPA nor the Parties have ever
granted a request for essential use allowances for halon, because
alternatives are available or because existing quantities of this
substance are large enough to provide for any needs for which
alternatives have not yet been developed.
    An additional essential-use exemption under the Protocol, as agreed
in Decision X/19, is the general exemption for laboratory and
analytical uses. This exemption is reflected in EPA's regulations at 40
CFR part 82, subpart A. While the Act does not specifically provide for
this exemption, EPA has determined that an exemption for essential
laboratory and analytical uses is allowable under the Act as a de
minimis exemption. The de minimis exemption is addressed in EPA's final
rule of March 13, 2001 (66 FR 14760-14770). The Parties to the Protocol
subsequently agreed (Decision XI/15) that the general exemption does
not apply to the following uses: testing of oil and grease, and total
petroleum hydrocarbons in water; testing of tar in road-paving
materials; and forensic finger-printing. EPA incorporated this
exemption at Appendix G to Subpart A of 40 CFR part 82 on February 11,
2002 (67 FR 6352). In a December 29, 2005 final rule, EPA extended the
general exemption for laboratory and analytical uses through December
31, 2007 (70 FR 77048), in accordance with Decision XV/8 of the Parties
to the Protocol.

C. What is the process for allocating essential use allowances?

    The procedure set out by Decision IV/25 calls for individual
Parties to nominate essential uses and the total amount of ODSs needed
for those essential uses on an annual basis. The Protocol's Technology
and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) evaluates the nominated essential
uses and makes recommendations to the Protocol Parties. The Parties
make the final decisions on whether to approve a Party's essential use
nomination at their annual meeting. This nomination cycle occurs
approximately two years before the year in which the allowances would
be in effect. The allowances allocated through today's action were
first nominated by the United States in January 2005.
    For MDIs, EPA requests information from manufacturers about the
number and type of MDIs they plan to produce, as well as the amount of
CFCs necessary for production. EPA then forwards the information to the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which determines the amount of CFCs
necessary for MDIs in the coming calendar year. Based on FDA's
determination, EPA proposes allocations to each eligible entity. Under

the Act and the Protocol, EPA may allocate essential use allowances in
quantities that together are below or equal to the total amount
approved by the Parties. EPA will not allocate essential use allowances
in amounts higher than the total approved by the Parties. For 2007, the
Parties authorized the United States to allocate up to 1,000 MT of CFCs
for essential uses.

III. Essential Use Allowances for Medical Devices

    The following is a step-by-step list of actions EPA and FDA have
taken thus far to implement the exemption for medical devices found at
section 604(d)(2) of the Act for the 2007 control period.
    1. On January 25, 2006, EPA sent letters to MDI manufacturers
requesting the following information under section 114 of the Act
(``114 letters''):

    a. The MDI product where CFCs will be used.
    b. The number of units of each MDI product produced from 1/1/05
to 12/31/05.
    c. The number of units anticipated to be produced in 2006.
    d. The gross target fill weight per unit (grams).
    e. Total amount of CFCs to be contained in the MDI product for
2007.
    f. The additional amount of CFCs necessary for production.
    g. The total CFC request per MDI product for 2007.

The 114 letters are available for review in the Air Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2006-0159. The companies requested that their responses be
treated as confidential business information; for this reason, EPA has
placed the responses in the confidential portion of the docket.
    2. On March 23, 2006, EPA sent FDA the information MDI
manufacturers provided in response to the 114 letters with a letter
requesting that FDA make a determination regarding the amount of CFCs
necessary for MDIs for calendar year 2007. This letter is available for
review in Air Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0159.
    3. On May 10, 2006, under section 114 of the Act, EPA sent letters
to MDI manufacturers requesting information on the amount and type of
CFC stocks owned by the company. EPA requested CFC stock information
pertaining to amounts and types of CFCs, pre-1996 CFCs and post-1996
CFCs, held by each company as of May 1, 2006. The purpose of this
request was to gather additional data to assist EPA and FDA to
determine the size of the 2007 essential use allocation exemption. The
114 letters are available for review in the Air Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0159. The companies requested that their responses be treated
as confidential business information; for this reason, EPA has placed
the responses in the confidential portion of the docket.
    4. On September 28, 2006, FDA sent a letter to EPA stating the
amount of CFCs determined by the Commissioner to be necessary for each
MDI company in 2007. This letter is available for review in the Air
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0159. In their letter, FDA informed EPA
that they had determined that 125.3 MT of CFCs were necessary for use
in MDIs in 2007. The letter stated ``Our determination for the
allocation of CFCs is lower than the total amount requested by
manufacturers. In reaching this estimate, we took into account the
manufacturers' production of MDIs that used CFCs as a propellant in
2005, their estimated production in 2006, their estimated production in
2007, and their current (as of May 1, 2006) stockpile levels. We have
also taken into account that roughly 40 percent of the albuterol MDIs
currently being produced use HFA-134a as their propellant. We have also
based our determination for 2007 on an estimate of the quantity of CFCs
that would allow manufacturers to maintain as much as a 12-month
stockpile in accordance with paragraph 3 of Decision XVI/12 and
paragraph 2 of Decision XVII/5.''
    The letter stated that the following assumptions were made in
reaching the determination for 2007:
     All manufacturers will procure the full quantity of CFCs
allocated to them for the year 2007.
     The number of albuterol CFC MDIs produced in the remainder
of 2006 and in 2007 will be 40 percent of the total number of albuterol
MDIs produced in those periods, and the number of albuterol CFC MDIs
produced in 2008 will be no more than half of the number produced in
2007, with albuterol HFA MDIs making up the remainder.
     No bulk CFCs currently held by, or allocated to, any
manufacturer will be exported from the United States.
    FDA informed EPA that the second assumption was based on an average
for the period of May 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006, and the full
2007 control period. Thus, CFC MDIs are expected to decline from 60% of
the total number of albuterol MDIs, as estimated currently, to less
than 40% by the end of 2007, which is the end of the averaging period.
    EPA has confirmed with FDA that this determination is consistent
with Decision XVII/5, including language on stocks that states that
``Parties shall take into account pre- and post-1996 stocks of
controlled substances as described in paragraph 1 (b) of decision IV/
25, such that no more than a one-year operational supply is maintained
by that manufacturer.'' In their analysis of a one-year operational
supply of CFCs for the production of CFC albuterol MDIs, FDA and EPA
took into account that the production of these MDIs would continue to
decrease as December 31, 2008, nears, thus requiring a reduced amount
of CFCs.
    In accordance with the FDA determination, today's action proposes
to allocate essential use allowances for a total of 125.3 MT of CFCs
for use in MDIs for calendar year 2007.
    The amounts listed in this proposal are subject to additional
review, and revision, by EPA and FDA if information demonstrates that
the proposed allocations are either too high or too low. We
specifically request comment on the extent to which the proposed
allocation of CFCs is sufficient to protect the public health and
ensure the manufacture and continuous availability of CFCs necessary to
meet the expected demand. We also request comment on whether the
proposed allocations (along with current stocks)--or an alternative
level--will best protect consumers by providing a smooth transition to
non-CFC alternatives. Commenters requesting increases or decreases of
essential use allowances should provide detailed information supporting
their claim for additional or fewer CFCs. Any company that needs less
than the full amount listed in this proposal should notify EPA of the
actual amount needed.

IV. Proposed Allocation of Essential Use Allowances for Calendar Year
2007

        Table I.--Essential Use Allowances for Calendar Year 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2007 Quantity
            Company                    Chemical           (metric tons)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (i) Metered Dose Inhalers (for Oral Inhalation) for Treatment of Asthma
                and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armstrong Pharmaceuticals.....  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                  0.0
                                 CFC-114.
Boehringer Ingelheim            CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                  0.0
 Pharmaceuticals.                CFC-114.
Inyx (Aventis)................  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 39.6
                                 CFC-114.
Schering-Plough Corporation...  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                  0.0
                                 CFC-114.
3M Pharmaceuticals............  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 45.7
                                 CFC-114.
Wyeth.........................  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 40.0
                                 CFC-114.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

EPA proposes to allocate essential use allowances for calendar year
2007 to the entities listed in Table 1. These allowances are for the
production or import of the specified quantity of class I controlled
substances solely for the specified essential use.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.
    EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits
related to this action. This analysis is contained in the Agency's
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the entire Title VI phaseout
program (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ``Regulatory Impact
Analysis: Compliance with Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the
Phaseout of Ozone Depleting Chemicals,'' July 1992). A copy of the
analysis is available in the docket for this action and the analysis is
briefly summarized here. The RIA examined the projected economic costs
of a complete phaseout of consumption of ozone-depleting substances, as
well as the projected benefits of phased reductions in total emissions
of CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances, including essential-use
CFCs used for metered-dose inhalers.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The recordkeeping and reporting requirements included in this action
are already included in an existing information collection burden and
this action does not make any changes that would affect the burden.
However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.8(a) under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0170, EPA ICR number 1432.25. A copy of the OMB
approved Information Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from
Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460 or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) Pharmaceutical preparations
manufacturing businesses (NAICS code 325412) that have less than 750
employees; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    This proposed rule provides an otherwise unavailable benefit to
those companies that are receiving essential use allowances by creating
an exemption to the regulatory phaseout of chlorofluorocarbons. We have
therefore concluded that today's proposed rule will relieve regulatory
burden for all small entities. We continue to be interested in the
potential impact of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub L.
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the
UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year.
    Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative, if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed a small government agency plan
under section 203 of the UMRA. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    Today's proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector, since it merely provides
exemptions from the 1996 phase out of class I ODSs. Similarly, EPA has
determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments, because this
rule merely allocates essential use exemptions to entities as an
exemption to the ban on production and import of class I ODSs.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Today's proposed rule affects only the companies that requested
essential use allowances. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety
risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect
on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency
must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable
to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such as the analysis
required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not subject to E.O.
13045 because it implements Section 604(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act
which states that the Agency shall authorize essential use exemptions
should the Food and Drug Administration determine that such exemptions
are necessary.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The rule affects only the
pharmaceutical companies that requested essential use allowances.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did
not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Chemicals, Chlorofluorocarbons, Environmental protection, Imports,
Methyl Chloroform, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 30, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    40 CFR Part 82 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

    1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

Subpart A--Production and Consumption Controls

    2. Section 82.8 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows:

Sec.  82.8  Grants of essential use allowances and critical use
allowances.

    (a) * * *

        Table I.--Essential Use Allowances for Calendar Year 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2007 Quantity
            Company                    Chemical           (metric tons)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (i) Metered Dose Inhalers (for Oral Inhalation) for Treatment of Asthma
                and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armstrong Pharmaceuticals.....  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                  0.0
                                 CFC-114.
Boehringer Ingelheim            CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 00.0
 Pharmaceuticals.                CFC-114.
Inyx (Aventis)................  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 39.6
                                 CFC-114.
Schering-Plough Corporation...  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                  0.0
                                 CFC-114.
3M Pharmaceuticals............  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 45.7
                                 CFC-114.
Wyeth.........................  CFC-11 or CFC-12 or                 40.0
                                 CFC-114.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E6-18581 Filed 11-2-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 57)]
[Notices]
[Page 14483-14484]
[DOCID:fr25mr10-111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2010-07]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before April 14, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-
0101 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to

http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laverne Brunache<PHONE_NUMBER> or
Tyneka Thomas<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC., on March 19, 2010.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2010-0101.
    Petitioner: Air Canada.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 93.123(a).
    Description of Relief Sought:
    Air Canada requests an exemption from the limit for DCA set forth
in Sec.  93.123(a), to permit the FAA to create commuter slots during
certain limited hours for Air Canada's use. The proposed commuter slots
would replace expiring slots currently held by Air Canada and used to
provide service from DCA to points in Canada. Specifically, Air Canada
desires one daily slot during each of the 1100, 1200, 1800, 1900, 2000
and 2100 hours. The proposed exemption would permit Air Canada to
continue operating its existing services.

[FR Doc. 2010-6552 Filed 3-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P