[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 154 (Tuesday, August 11, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48019-48022]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19182]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0834; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-045-AD;
Amendment 39-18227; AD 2015-16-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directives (AD) 2003-14-11,
AD 2004-11-08, AD 2004-13-25, AD 2004-18-14, AD 2007-05-12, AD 2008-06-
07, AD 2009-18-20, AD 2010-15-02, and AD 2012-04-07 that apply to
certain Airbus Model A330 and A340 series airplanes. AD 2003-14-11, AD
2004-11-08, AD 2004-13-25, AD 2004-18-14, AD 2007-05-12, AD 2008-06-07,
AD 2009-18-20, AD 2010-15-02, and AD 2012-04-07 required revising the
maintenance program to incorporate certain maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations; replacing certain flap rotary actuators;
repetitively inspecting elevator servo-controllers and pressure relief
valves of the spoiler servo controls; repetitively testing the elevator
servo control loops, modifying the elevator servo controls, and
repetitively replacing certain retraction brackets of the main landing
gear; and revising the airplane flight manual. This new AD requires
revising the maintenance program or inspection program to incorporate
certain maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. This
new AD also removes Airbus Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series
airplanes from the applicability and adds Airbus Model A330-323
airplanes to the applicability. This AD was prompted by a determination
that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness
limitations are necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the aging
effects of aircraft systems. Such aging effects could change the
characteristics of those systems, which, in isolation or in combination
with one or more other specific failures or events, could result in
failure of certain life limited parts, which could reduce the
structural integrity of the airplane or reduce the controllability of
the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective September 15, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 15,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0834; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac
Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0834.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to revise the following airworthiness directives
that applied to certain Airbus Model A330 and A340 series airplanes.
     AD 2003-14-11, Amendment 39-13230 (68 FR 41521, July 14,
2003).
     AD 2004-11-08, Amendment 39-13654 (69 FR 31874, June 8,
2004).
     AD 2004-13-25, Amendment 39-13707 (69 FR 41394, July 9,
2004).
     AD 2004-18-14, Amendment 39-13793 (69 FR 55326, September
14, 2004).
     AD 2007-05-12, Amendment 39-14973 (72 FR 10057, March 7,
2007).
     AD 2008-06-07, Amendment 39-15419 (73 FR 13103, March 12,
2008; corrected April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20367)).
     AD 2009-18-20, Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313, September
9, 2009).
     AD 2010-15-02, Amendment 39-16368 (75 FR 42589, July 22,
2010).
     AD 2012-04-07, Amendment 39-16963 (77 FR 12989, March 5,
2012).

    The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2015 (80 FR
12360). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on November 7, 2013 (78
FR 66861). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that more
restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations were
necessary. The NPRM proposed to supersede AD 2003-14-11, Amendment 39-
13230 (68 FR 41521, July 14, 2003); AD 2004-11-08, Amendment 39-13654
(69 FR 31874, June 8, 2004); AD 2004-13-25, Amendment 39-13707 (69 FR
41394, July 9, 2004); AD 2004-18-14, Amendment 39-13793 (69 FR 55326,
September 14, 2004); AD 2008-06-07, Amendment 39-15419 (73 FR 13103,
March 12, 2008; corrected April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20367)); and AD 2012-
04-07, Amendment 39-16963 (77 FR 12989, March 5, 2012) to require
actions intended to address the aging effects of aircraft systems. The
NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance program or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate certain maintenance requirements
and airworthiness limitations.
    The SNPRM (80 FR 12360, March 9, 2015) proposed to supersede AD
2007-05-12, Amendment 39-14973 (72 FR 10057, March 7, 2007); AD 2009-
18-20, Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313, September 9, 2009); and AD
2010-15-02, Amendment 39-16368 (75 FR 42589, July 22, 2010); in
addition to those ADs already identified in the NPRM (78 FR 66861,
November 7, 2013), as well as to require more restrictive limitations
and to add Airbus Model A330-323 airplanes to the applicability. We are
issuing this AD to address the aging effects of aircraft systems. Such
aging effects could change the characteristics of those systems, which,
in isolation or in combination with one or more other specific failures
or events, could result in failure of certain life limited parts, which
could reduce the structural integrity of the airplane or reduce the
controllability of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0268, dated November 7, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition on certain Airbus Model
A330 series airplanes. EASA AD 2013-0268 supersedes and retains the
requirements of four EASA ADs and requires accomplishment of the
actions specified in Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section
(ALS) Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27,
2013. The MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations for Airbus aeroplanes are
currently published in Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS)
documents.
    The airworthiness limitations applicable to the Ageing Systems
Maintenance (ASM) are given in Airbus A330 ALS Part 4, which is
approved by EASA.
    Revision 04 of Airbus A330 ALS Part 4 introduces more
restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness
limitations. Failure to comply with these instructions could result
in an unsafe condition.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2012-0020 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2012-0020], which is superseded, and requires accomplishment of the
actions specified in Airbus A330 ALS Part 4 at Revision 04.
    In addition, this [EASA] AD also supersedes EASA AD 2006-0159
[http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2006-0159], EASA AD 2008-0026 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2008-0026] and EASA AD 2008-0160 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2008-0160] [which correspond to FAA ADs 2007-
05-12, Amendment 39-14973 (72 FR 10057, March 7, 2007); 2010-15-02,
Amendment 39-16368 (75 FR 42589, July 22, 2010); and 2009-18-20,
Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313, September 9, 2009), respectively],
whose requirements applicable to A330 aeroplanes have been
transferred into Airbus A330 ALS Part 4.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-
2013-0834.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received. An anonymous commenter
supported the SNPRM (80 FR 12360, March 9, 2015).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM (80 FR 12360, March 9, 2015) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM (80 FR 12360, March 9, 2015).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus issued A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 4--
Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, and
Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance (ASM), Variation 4.1
and Variation 4.2, both dated July 23, 2014. This service information
describes preventative maintenance requirements and associated
airworthiness limitations applicable to aircraft systems susceptible to
aging effects. 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 of this
AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 79 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost $0 per product.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators to be $13,430, or $170 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0834; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2003-14-11, Amendment 39-13230
(68 FR 41521, July 14, 2003); AD 2004-11-08, Amendment 39-13654 (69 FR
31874, June 8, 2004); AD 2004-13-25, Amendment 39-13707 (69 FR 41394,
July 9, 2004); AD 2004-18-14, Amendment 39-13793 (69 FR 55326,
September 14, 2004); AD 2007-05-12, Amendment 39-14973 (72 FR 10057,
March 7, 2007); AD 2008-06-07, Amendment 39-15419 (73 FR 13103, March
12, 2008; corrected April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20367)); AD 2009-18-20,
Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313, September 9, 2009); AD 2010-15-02,
Amendment 39-16368 (75 FR 42589, July 22, 2010); AD 2012-04-07,
Amendment 39-16963 (77 FR 12989, March 5, 2012); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

2015-16-02 Airbus: Amendment 39-18227. Docket No. FAA-2013-0834;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-045-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective September 15, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces the ADs specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(b)(9) of this AD.
    (1) AD 2003-14-11, Amendment 39-13230 (68 FR 41521, July 14,
2003).
    (2) AD 2004-11-08, Amendment 39-13654 (69 FR 31874, June 8,
2004).
    (3) AD 2004-13-25, Amendment 39-13707 (69 FR 41394, July 9,
2004).
    (4) AD 2004-18-14, Amendment 39-13793 (69 FR 55326, September
14, 2004).
    (5) AD 2007-05-12, Amendment 39-14973 (72 FR 10057, March 7,
2007).
    (6) AD 2008-06-07, Amendment 39-15419 (73 FR 13103, March 12,
2008; corrected April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20367)).
    (7) AD 2009-18-20, Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313, September 9,
2009).
    (8) AD 2010-15-02, Amendment 39-16368 (75 FR 42589, July 22,
2010).
    (9) AD 2012-04-07, Amendment 39-16963 (77 FR 12989, March 5,
2012).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -
243, -223F, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342,
and -343 airplanes; certificated in any category; all manufacturer
serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive
maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are
necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the aging effects of
aircraft systems. Such aging effects could change the
characteristics of those systems, which, in isolation or in
combination with one or more other specific failures or events,
could result in failure of certain life limited parts, which could
reduce the structural integrity of the airplane or reduce the
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Maintenance Program Revision and Actions

    Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the
maintenance program or inspection program, as applicable, by
incorporating Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS)
Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27,
2013, and Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance (ASM),
Variation 4.1 and Variation 4.2, both dated July 23, 2014. The
initial compliance times for the actions are within the applicable
compliance times specified in the Record of Revisions pages of
Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04,
dated August 27, 2013, Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems
Maintenance (ASM), Variation 4.1 and Variation 4.2, both dated July
23, 2014, or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever is later, except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(h) Exceptions to Initial Compliance Times

    (1) Where Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, defines a calendar compliance
time for elevator servo-controls having part number (P/N) SC4800-2,
SC4800-3, SC4800-4, SC4800-6, SC4800-7, or SC4800-8 as ``August 31,
2004,'' the calendar compliance time is June 13, 2007 (34 months
after August 13, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-13-25,
Amendment 39-13707 (69 FR 41394, July 9, 2004))).
    (2) Where Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, defines a calendar compliance
time for spoiler servo-controls (SSCs) having P/N 1386A0000-01, P/N
1386B0000-01, P/N 1387A0000-01 or P/N 1387B0000-01 as ``December 31,
2003,'' the calendar compliance time is November 19, 2005 (13 months
after October 19, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-18-14,
Amendment 39-13793 (69 FR 55326, September 14, 2004))).
    (3) Where Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, defines a calendar compliance
time for elevator servo-controls having P/N SC4800-73, SC4800-93,
SC4800-103 and SC4800-113 as ``June 30, 2008,'' the calendar
compliance time is September 16, 2009 (17 months after April 16,
2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-06-07, Amendment 39-15419 (73 FR
13103, March 12, 2008; corrected April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20367)))).
    (4) The initial compliance time for replacement of the
retraction brackets of the main landing gear (MLG) having a part
number specified in paragraphs (h)(4)(i) through (h)(4)(xvi) of this
AD is before the accumulation of 19,800 total landings on the
affected retraction brackets of the MLG, or within 900 flight hours
after April 9, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2012-04-07, Amendment
39-16963 (77 FR 12989, March 5, 2012), whichever occurs later.
    (i) 201478303
    (ii) 201478304
    (iii) 201478305
    (iv) 201478306
    (v) 201478307
    (vi) 201478308
    (vii) 201428380
    (viii) 201428381
    (ix) 201428382
    (x) 201428383
    (xi) 201428384
    (xii) 201428385
    (xiii) 201428378
    (xiv) 201428379

    (xv) 201428351
    (xvi) 201428352
    (5) Where Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance,
Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013, defines a calendar compliance
time for the modification of SSCs on three hydraulic circuits having
part numbers MZ4339390-01X, MZ4306000-01X, MZ4339390-02X, MZ4306000-
02X, MZ4339390-10X, or MZ4306000-10X as ``March 5, 2010,'' the
calendar compliance time is April 14, 2011 (18 months after October
14, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-18-20, Amendment 39-16017
(74 FR 46313, September 9, 2009))).
    (6) Where Note (6) of ``ATA 27-64-00 Flight Control--Spoiler
Hydraulic Actuation,'' of Sub-part 4-2-1, ``Life Limits,'' of Sub-
part 4-2, ``Systems Life Limited Components,'' of Airbus A330 ALS
Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27,
2013, defines a calendar date of ``September 5, 2008,'' as a date
for the determination of accumulated flight cycles since the
aircraft initial entry into service, the date is October 14, 2009
(the effective date of AD 2009-18-20, Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR
46313, September 9, 2009)).
    (7) Where Note (6) of ``ATA 27-64-00 Flight Control--Spoiler
Hydraulic Actuation,'' of Sub-part 4-2-1, ``Life Limits,'' of Sub-
part 4-2, ``Systems Life Limited Components,'' of Airbus A330 ALS
Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27,
2013, defines a calendar compliance time as ``March 5, 2010,'' for
the modification of affected servo controls, the calendar compliance
time is April 14, 2011 (18 months after October 14, 2009 (the
effective date of AD 2009-18-20, Amendment 39-16017 (74 FR 46313,
September 9, 2009))).

(i) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may
be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 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 Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (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
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2013-0268, dated November
7, 2013, 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-2013-0834.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section ALS Part 4--
Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 04, dated August 27, 2013.
    (ii) Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance (ASM),
Variation 4.1, dated July 23, 2014.
    (iii) Airbus A330 ALS Part 4--Aging Systems Maintenance (ASM),
Variation 4.2, dated July 23, 2014.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 28, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-19182 Filed 8-10-15; 08:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 26, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4217-4220]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01381]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-1363; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-040-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Models MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35,
MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, and MU-2B-60 airplanes. This proposed AD results
from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated
by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an
unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as reports of cracks found in the attach fittings of the main
landing gear oleo strut. We are issuing this proposed AD to require
actions to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., c/o Turbine Aircraft
Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, ext. 209; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://mu-2aircraft.com. You may review this referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2016-
1363; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, ASW-143 (c/o San Antonio MIDO), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650,
San Antonio, Texas 78216; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-1363;
Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-040-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB), which is the aviation
authority for Japan, has issued AD No. TCD-8595-2015, dated July 1,
2015 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI) Models
MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 airplanes. You may examine the MCAI on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating it in Docket No. FAA-2016-1363.
    We have received reports of seven failures of the main landing gear
oleo strut attach fitting on certain MHI Models MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, MU-
2B-36, MU-2B-36A, and MU-2B-60 airplanes. Investigation revealed that
the failures resulted from improper lubrication and/or hard landings,
which caused cracks to develop in the main landing gear oleo strut
attach fitting.
    Japan is the State of Design for MHI Models MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and
MU-2B-36, which the MCAI AD applies to, and the United States is the
State of Design for MHI Models MU-2B-36A and MU-2B-60 airplanes.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. has issued MU-2 Service Bulletin
No. 243, dated June 30, 2015, and MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 105/32-017,
dated September 29, 2015. These service bulletins describe procedures
for visually inspecting the lugs of the oleo attach fittings on both
sides for cracks, and if any visible cracks are found, replacing with a
new fitting. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. has also issued MU-2
Service News JCAB T.C.: No. 171, FAA T.C.: No. 124/32-011, dated April
27, 2012, and MU-2 Service News JCAB T.C.: No. 176, FAA T.C.: No. 128/
32-013, dated July 18, 2013. This service information specifies doing
repetitive ultrasound inspections of the main landing gear oleo upper
attach fittings for cracks and ensuring proper lubrication of the main
landing gear oleo fitting. All the related 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 of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    We have determined that the repetitive visual inspections specified
in the MCAI are not adequate for detecting cracks in the main landing
gear oleo strut attach fitting. Repetitive ultrasonic inspections of
the main landing gear oleo strut attach fitting have been added into
the maintenance requirement manual for these airplanes, which is not
considered mandatory in the FAA's airworthiness regulatory system.
Therefore, we are proposing to incorporate that requirement through the
rulemaking process.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 95 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 5 work-hours per
product to comply with the visual inspection requirement of this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the visual
inspection requirements of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$40,375, or $425 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per product
to comply with the ultrasound inspection requirements of this proposed
AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the ultrasound
inspection requirements of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$24,225, or $255 per product.
    Owner/operators have the option to do an ultrasound inspection in
lieu of the required visual inspection.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take

about 24 work-hours and require parts costing $5,220, for a cost of
$7,260 per product to replace the left-hand main landing gear oleo
strut. We have no way of determining the number of products that may
need this action.
    In addition, we also estimate that any necessary follow-on actions
would take about 45 work-hours and require parts costing $5,220, for a
cost of $9,045 per product to replace the right-hand main landing gear
oleo strut. We have no way of determining the number of products that
may need this action.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We 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 AD:

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.: Docket No. FAA-2016-1363;
Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-040-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 11, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Models MU-
2B-30, MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36 airplanes, serial numbers 502 through 696,
except 652 and 661, and Models MU-2B-36A and MU-2B-60 airplanes,
serial numbers 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as reports of
cracks found in the fittings of the main landing gear oleo strut. We
are issuing this proposed AD to prevent failure of the main landing
gear oleo strut attach fitting, which could cause the landing gear
to fail and result in loss of control.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of this AD or within the next 6 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do a visual
inspection of the main landing gear oleo upper attach fittings for
cracks. Do the inspection following the INSTRUCTIONS section in
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 243,
dated June 30, 2015, and the INSTRUCTIONS section in Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 105/32-017, dated
September 29, 2015, as applicable.
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, if no signs of cracks are found,
lubricate the pin assembly attached to the main landing gear oleo
attach fitting as specified in Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-
2 Service News JCAB T.C.: No. 171, FAA T.C.: No. 124/32-011, dated
April 27, 2012.
    (3) Within the next 100 hours TIS after doing the initial visual
inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD or within the
next 12 months after doing the initial visual inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, whichever occurs first, do an
ultrasound inspection of the main landing gear oleo upper attach
fittings for cracks as specified in Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,
Ltd. MU-2 Service News JCAB T.C.: No. 176, FAA T.C.: No. 128/32-013,
dated July 18, 2013. This ultrasound inspection may also be done in
place of the visual inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this
AD if done within the next 100 hours TIS after the effective date of
this AD or within the next 6 months after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs first. Repetitively thereafter inspect every
600 hours TIS or 36 months, whichever occurs first, and any time a
hard landing or overweight landing occurs.
    (4) Before further flight after any inspection required in
paragraph (f)(3) of this AD, if no signs of cracks are found,
lubricate the pin assembly attached to the main landing gear oleo
attach fitting as specified in Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-
2 Service News JCAB T.C.: No. 171, FAA T.C.: No. 124/32-011, dated
April 27, 2012, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service
News JCAB T.C.: No. 176, FAA T.C.: No. 128/32-013, dated July 18,
2013.
    (5) Before further flight after any inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(3) of this AD where cracks are found,
replace the main landing gear oleo upper attach fittings following
the INSTRUCTIONS section in Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2
Service Bulletin No. 243, dated June 30, 2015, and the INSTRUCTIONS
sections in Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service Bulletin
No. 105/32-017, dated September 29, 2015, as applicable. After
replacement, continue with the repetitive ultrasound inspection
requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this AD.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, ASW-
143 (c/o San Antonio MIDO), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San
Antonio, Texas 78216; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) AD No. TCD-
8585-2015, dated July 1, 2015, for related information. You may
examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-1363. For service
information related to this AD, contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
America, Inc., c/o Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy
Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
ext. 209; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://mu-2aircraft.com.
You may review this referenced service information at the FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 16, 2016.
Melvin Johnson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. 2016-01381 Filed 1-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


fundamentally for industrial, commercial, or institutional purposes and
not intended fundamentally for sale to an electric utility if at least
50 percent of the aggregate of such output, on an annual basis, is used
for industrial, commercial, residential or institutional purposes. In
addition, applicants for facilities that do not meet this safe harbor
standard may present evidence to the Commission that the facilities
should nevertheless be certified given state laws applicable to sales
of electric energy or unique technological, efficiency, economic, and
variable thermal energy requirements.
    (4) For purposes of paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section, a
new cogeneration facility of 5 MW or smaller will be presumed to
satisfy the requirements of those paragraphs.
    (5) For purposes of paragraph (d)(1) of this section, where a
thermal host existed prior to the development of a new cogeneration
facility whose thermal output will supplant the thermal source
previously in use by the thermal host, the thermal output of such new
cogeneration facility will be presumed to satisfy the requirements of
paragraph (d)(1).

0
6. Section 292.206 is removed.

0
7. In Sec.  292.207, paragraphs (a)(1)(iv), and (d)(1)(iii) are revised
to read as follows:

Sec.  292.207  Procedures for obtaining qualifying status.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) Notices of self-certification or self-recertification, other
than for new cogeneration facilities, will not be published in the
Federal Register. Notices of self-certification or self-recertification
of new cogeneration facilities will be published in the Federal
Register; such self-certifications and self-recertifications should
include a form of notice suitable for publication in the Federal
Register.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) The Commission may, on its own motion or on the motion of any
person, revoke the qualifying status of a self-certified or self-
recertified qualifying facility if it finds that the self-certified or
self-recertified qualifying facility does not meet the applicable
requirements for qualifying facilities.
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec.  292.601, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  292.601  Exemption of qualifying facilities from the Federal
Power Act.

* * * * *
    (c) General rule. Any qualifying facility described in paragraph
(a) of this section shall be exempt from all sections of the Federal
Power Act, except:
    (1) Sections 205 and 206; however, sales of energy or capacity made
by qualifying facilities 20 MW or smaller, or made pursuant to a
contract executed on or before March 17, 2006 or made pursuant to a
state regulatory authority's implementation of section 210 the Public
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. 824a-1, shall be
exempt from scrutiny under sections 205 and 206;
    (2) Section 1-18, and 21-30;

    (3) Sections 202(c), 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 220, 221 and 222;
    (4) Sections 305(c); and
    (5) Any necessary enforcement provision of part III of the Federal
Power Act (including but not limited to sections 306, 307, 308, 309,
314, 315, 316 and 316A) with regard to the sections listed in
paragraphs (c)(1), (2), (3) and (4) of this section.

0
9. In Sec.  292.602, paragraphs (b) and (c) are revised to read as
follows:

Sec.  292.602  Exemption of qualifying facilities from certain State
law and regulation.

* * * * *
    (b) Exemption from the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005.
A qualifying facility described in paragraph (a) of this section or a
utility geothermal small power production facility shall not be
considered to be an ``electric utility company'' as defined in section
1262(5) of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, 42 U.S.C.
16451(5).
    (c) Exemption from certain State laws and regulations.
    (1) Any qualifying facility shall be exempted (except as provided
in paragraph (b)(2)) of this section from State laws or regulations
respecting:
    (i) The rates of electric utilities; and
    (ii) The financial and organizational regulation of electric
utilities.
    (2) A qualifying facility may not be exempted from State laws and
regulations implementing subpart C.
    (3) Upon request of a state regulatory authority or nonregulated
electric utility, the Commission may consider a limitation on the
exemptions specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (4) Upon request of any person, the Commission may determine
whether a qualifying facility is exempt from a particular State law or
regulation.

    Note: The following Appendix will not be published in the Code
of Federal Regulations.

Appendix: List of Petitioners Requesting Clarification or Submitting
Comments

American Chemistry Council
American Electric Power Service Corporation jointly with AEP Texas
North Company, AEP Texas Central Company, Appalachian Power Company,
Columbus Southern Power Company, Indiana Michigan Power Company,
Kentucky Power Company, Kingsport Power Company, Ohio Power Company,
Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric Power
Company, and Wheeling Power Company (collectively, AEP)
American Forest & Paper Association (American Forest & Paper)
American Public Power Association (APPA)
American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)
ARIPPA
California Electricity Oversight Board (CEOB)
Calpine Corporation (Calpine)
CE Generation, LLC (CE Generation)
Cinergy Solutions, Inc. (Cinergy)
Cogeneration Association California jointly with Energy Producers
and Users Coalition, Cogeneration Coalition of Washington, and
Nevada Independent Energy Coalition (collectively, QF Parties)
Cogentrix Energy, inc. (Cogentrix) jointly with Goldman Sachs Group,
Inc. (Goldman Sachs) (collectively, Independent Sellers)
Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Constellation)
Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Delta Power Company, LLC (Delta Power) jointly with Juniper
Generation, LLC (Juniper), and California Cogeneration Council
(California Cogen)
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Dow Chemical Company (Dow)
Edison Electric Institute (EEI)
Edison Mission Energy jointly with Edison Mission Marketing &
Trading, Inc., Midwest Generation EME, LLC (collectively, Edison
Mission Energy) (intervention only)
Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA)
Electricity Consumers Resource Council (ELCON) jointly with American
Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) (collectively, Industrial Consumers)
Enel North America, Inc. (Enel)
Entergy Services, Inc. jointly with Entergy Arkansas, Inc.; Entergy
Gulf States, Inc.; Entergy Louisiana, Inc.; Entergy Mississippi,
Inc.; and Entergy New Orleans, Inc. (collectively, Entergy)
Environmental Protection Agency
The Fertilizer Institute (Fertilizer Institute)
Florida Industrial Cogeneration Association (Florida Industrial
Cogeneration)
GE Energy Financial Services (GE)
Granite State Hydropower Association, Inc. (Granite State
Hydropower)
Illinois Landfill Gas Coalition (Illinois Landfill Gas)
Indeck Energy Services, Inc. (Indeck)
Kentucky Public Service Commission (Kentucky Commission)
Marina Energy, LLC (Marina Energy)
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC)
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)
New York State Electric & Gas Corporation (NYSEG) jointly with
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (Rochester G&E)
Non-Utility QF Group
North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency (NCEMPA)
Occidental Chemical Corporation (Occidental)
Oklahoma Corporation Commission (Oklahoma Commission)
Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company (OG&E)
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
Primary Energy Ventures LLC (Primary Energy)
Process Gas Consumers Group Electricity Committee (Electricity
Committee)
Progress Energy, Inc. (Progress Energy)
Public Service Company of New Mexico (PSNM) jointly with Texas-New
Mexico Power Company (TNP)
Public Service Electric and Gas Company jointly with PSEG Power LLC,
PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC, and PSEG Global L.L.C.
(collectively, PSEG)
Public Utility Commission of Ohio (Ohio Commission)
Ridgewood Renewable Power, LLC (Ridgewood)
Solar Turbines Incorporated (Solar Turbines)
Southern California Edison Company (SoCal Edison)
Transmission Access Policy Study Group (TAPS)
U.S. Combined Heat and Power Association (USCHPA)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Xcel Energy Services Inc. (Xcel)
York County Solid Waste and Refuse Authority (York County)

[FR Doc. 06-1194 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 1 Smart Growth and Active Aging National Recognition Program Introduction Definitions:

* Smart Growth ( SG): Smart Growth is defined as development that serves the environment, community, economy, and public health. The principles of smart growth include: 1) Mix land use; 2) Take advantage of compact building design; 3) Create a range of housing opportunities and choices; 4) Create walkable neighborhoods; 5) Foster distinctive, attractive neighborhoods with a sense of place; 6) Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical resources; 7) Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities; 8) Provide a variety of transportation choices; 9) Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective; 10) Encourage community stakeholders collaboration in development decisions.

* Active Aging/ Physical Activity ( PA): includes planning and implementing a variety of widely accessible programs and/ or self directed opportunities for those 60+ and which emphasize activities that increase endurance, strength, flexibility, balance, and the principles of injury prevention. These types of activities include walking, biking, fitness trails and similar activities/ programs at various levels of intensity to fit the capacities of participants.

* Community assessment or survey: can include formal needs assessment or community survey or discussion of community needs with service providers with smart growth or active aging/ physical activity programming or opportunities in the community. To be completed by applicant:

I have reviewed the accompanying policy and activity components that are integral to the smart growth principles above, and understand that they should form the basis for our community's responses to the application items for the Smart Growth and Active. Aging National Recognition Program.

Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement The public reporting burden for filling out this questionnaire form is estimated to average one hour per response. This includes time for reading the instructions and providing the requested information. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimate, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D. C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed form to this address. 2 OMB Control No.: 2090 New EPA Form No.: XXXX Expiration Date: xx/ xx/ xx Questionnaire 1. Our community has defined goals or a mission for advancing or applying * smart growth principles.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 2. Our community's governing body has conducted or commissioned a * community assessment for applying * smart growth principles.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 3. Our community has defined goals or a mission for increasing older adult participation in * active aging/ physical activity.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 4. Our community's governing body has conducted or commissioned a * community assessment of older adult participation in active aging/ physical programs or opportunities.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 5. Our community has developed a plan that includes feasibility, costs, and impacts of adopting a smart growth approach to plan for the future.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 6. Our community has studied the feasibility, cost, impacts, time frame and leadership for creating/ promoting active aging/ physical activity for aging adults.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 7. Our community is actively engaged in formulating plans and strategies for specifically linking smart growth initiatives with programs, amenities or opportunities that include active aging/ physical activity for older adults

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 3 8. Our community has established interagency committees, task forces, or other community partnerships with local aging organizations, service providers, and agencies as a means of coordinating activities and programs with smart growth and active aging/ physical activity components.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 9. Our community has legislative, zoning, comprehensive plan initiatives and other policies in place or in consideration that include provision for both smart growth and active aging/ physical activity programs or opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 10. Our community has created pilot programs, or has existing programs for active aging/ physical activity for older adults which take advantage of the resources and environments created by local smart growth activities such as safe walking area, biking amenities, age sensitive exercise trails, safe parks, etc.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 11. Our community's comprehensive planning integrates smart growth principles and promotes application of these to encompass active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 12. Our community is increasing its capacity through actions such as budget allocation, staff resources, infrastructure improvement, etc. for systematically expanding on smart growth activities.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 13. Our community is reaching out to local/ county/ state officials and departments, land developers, and community organizations to expand smart growth activities.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 4 14. Our community includes gathering evidence about and evaluating the effectiveness of and level of participation in our active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 15. Our community has an initiative that includes promotion, advertising, recruitment, and widely available programs and opportunities to engage more older adults in active aging/ physical activity.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 16. Our community has the capacity to implement a model program combining smart growth principles with programs emphasizing active aging/ physical activity for older adults.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 17. Our community has a well established smart growth initiative and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities.

18. Our community is planning to expand these to a wider segment of our population as well as the partnerships that will support these programs.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 19. Our community has an established coalition of service providers, advocacy organizations, businesses and governmental agencies who are cooperating to create more innovative and widely available programs that integrate smart growth principles and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 20. Our community has an existing model program integrating active aging/ physical activity and smart growth for older adults and we can provide technical assistance and a contact person to share information with other communities.

Not at all

Partially completed

Fully Completed 5 Applicant completing this questionnaire Name: _____________________________________

Title: _______________

Organization: _____

Address: __________ ___________________________________________

City: _________, State__________ Zip:________

Phone: ___________ Fax:___________

Email: ____________________


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12376-12377]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05672]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: EC18-70-000.
    Applicants: NRG Wholesale Generation LP, Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of NRG Wholesale Generation LP, et al.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG18-56-000.
    Applicants: Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1966-002.
    Applicants: NRG Wholesale Generation LP.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Regarding
Upstream Change in Control and Request for Waiver to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-839-001.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Refile Rate Schedule No. 290 to be
effective 4/11/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1091-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
of Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service Agreement (No. 496).
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1092-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-03-15 SA 3104 ENO-ENO
GIA (J481) to be effective 3/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5045.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1093-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1266R10 Kansas Municipal
Energy Agency NITSA and NOA to be effective 3/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1094-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL Revisions to LCEC Rate
Schedule No. 317 to be effective 1/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1095-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL Revisions to FKEC Rate
Schedule No. 322 to be effective 1/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1098-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-03-15 Second Amendment
to ABAOA with Arizona Public Service to be effective 5/15/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5069.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1102-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3-15-18 Unexecuted
Agreement, City and County of San Francisco WDT SA (SA 275) to be
effective 5/14/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1106-000.
    Applicants: Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
5/15/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5086.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1110-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1795 Oklahoma Gas and
Electric Company PTP Notice of Cancellation to be effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1116-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, SA No. 4958;
Queue No. AC1-035 to be effective 2/13/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/15/18.
    Accession Number: 20180315-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings

    Docket Numbers: RD18-3-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
Western Electricity Coordinating Council.
    Description: Joint Petition of the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation and Western Electricity Coordinating Council
for Approval of Retirement of Regional Reliability Standard PRC-004-
WECC-2.
    Filed Date: 3/9/18.
    Accession Number: 20180309-5269.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/16/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 15, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-05672 Filed 3-20-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 1, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 211)]
[Notices]
[Page 64266-64267]
[DOCID:fr01no06-65]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0811; FRL-8097-1]

Pesticide Products; Registration Application

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of an application to register a
pesticide product containing a new active ingredient not included in
any currently registered products pursuant to the provisions of section
3(c)(4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), as amended.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 1, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0811, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777
S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during
the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0811. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line 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 regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov website 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
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the 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 docket are listed in the docket 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation
of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Greenway, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticides,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania, Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
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:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. 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.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Registration Application

    EPA received an application as follows to register a pesticide
product containing an active ingredient not included in any previously
registered products pursuant to the provision of section 3(c)(4) of
FIFRA. Notice of receipt of this application does not imply a decision
by the Agency on the application.

Product Containing an Active Ingredient not Included in any Previously
Registered Product

    File Symbol: 75771-R. Applicant: Ticks or Mosquitoes, LLC, 905 S.
Kingshighway, Sikeston, MO 63801. Product name: Biter Fighter \TM\.
Type of product: Biochemical insect attractant. Active ingredient:
Calcium lactate at 25.19%. Proposed classification/Use: None. An
attractant used in insect traps.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: October 25, 2006.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-18380 Filed 10-31-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18410-18411]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07817]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1219]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey of Health Care
Practitioners for Device Labeling Format and Content

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by May 6,
2015.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the title Survey of Health Care
Practitioners for Device Labeling Format and Content. Also include the
FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Survey of Health Care Practitioners for Device Labeling Format and
Content--21 CFR Part 801 (OMB Control Number 0910-NEW)

    The purpose of this study is to compare existing device labeling
from approximately six different types of medical devices with a
standard content and format of the same labeling that FDA researchers
will develop using the existing labeling as their source of the
information.
    Building upon the research methodology and success of the approach
FDA used to evaluate drug labeling, we propose to measure the usability
and usefulness of a draft standard content and format of device
labeling against existing manufacturer labeling of the same device.
This will support our research that has already been done to assess
whether health care practitioners (HCPs) find the format and content of
device labeling to be clear, understandable, useful, and user friendly
(OMB control number 0910-0715). Findings will provide evidence to
inform FDA's planned regulatory approach to standardizing medical
device labeling across the United States.
    In the Federal Register of September 12, 2014 (79 FR 54727), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. FDA used comments from the medical device
industry, health care professionals, caregivers, and patients to help
formulate the objectives and define the scope of this study. The
received comments are followed by FDA's responses as follows:
    (Comment 1) One comment stated that FDA should coordinate with the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) as they already have
published a consensus standard (F2943) on this topic. This standard
resulted from the work of a multi-stakeholder working group.
    (Response) FDA reviewed the consensus standard (F2943) when we
drafted the outline for this study. We consulted with a member of the
ASTM committee. We also requested a member of the committee to be on
our strategic planning committee for this study.
    (Comment 2) A comment stated that FDA does not follow the guidance
on formative human factors and usability studies. The guidance provides
good direction on appropriately choosing representative end users,
replicating the intended user environment, and evaluating the user-
product interface (see FDA draft guidance ``Applying Human Factors and
Usability Engineering to Optimize Medical Device Design'' issued on
June 22, 2011).
    (Response) FDA had designed the protocol for this study with a
human factors expert and a social scientist. In this particular study,
we will be doing a cognitive test of the health care practitioners.
They will be asked to find a piece of information in the draft outline
of standard content of labeling, or in the manufacturer's existing
labeling. They will not be interacting with the device and this will be
a usability test; they will be responding to scenarios to search for
information.
    (Comment 3) One comment stated that FDA should ask the question,
particularly to physicians, whether the standard of care requires them
to read the user instructions and understand the product's warning.
    (Response) This study is the third part of a three-part study. FDA
performed focus groups of health care practitioners asking them what
they want in labeling, where do they find labeling, what are the most
important sections of labeling, and whether they even look at labeling.
Their responses indicated that they do not look at labeling because it
is complicated and they typically cannot find the information they want
in one section. They stated they would like an abbreviated version of
labeling in order to find use information more easily, they would like
a standard content of labeling, and they also would like to find it
electronically and in one place if possible.
    FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine; we do, however,
regulate labeling that accompanies a device. Based on the previous
phases of the studies already done, we now want to test a standard
content of labeling against an existing piece of the same labeling to
see if health care practitioners can find what they need in a
consistent and easy way. This is a cognitive testing of a standard
content of labeling and does not include questions regarding whether or
not someone is required to read the labeling before using the device.
    We will be using outside experts to develop the protocol, develop
the scenarios, develop the draft standardized labeling, perform the
testing, and provide a summary of the study. This is being done through
the Entrepreneurs in Residence program that is funded by the White
House to use outside experts and their special knowledge and skills to
work on an innovative idea that helps the government when faced with a
unique problem. Dr. Daryle Gardner-Bonneau is a renowned social
scientist and human factors specialist who has worked with the device
industry, standards organizations, and the National Research Council on
issues with medical device labeling. Patricia Kingsley is a former FDA
employee who worked on medical device labeling issues. Nancy Ostrove is
a former FDA employee who worked on surveys and studies with drug
community when the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research was
developing standardized labeling

for drugs. Dr. Ruth Day, a social scientist researcher at Duke
University, has worked as a special government employee on the labeling
for drugs. Ron Charnock is CEO of Kwikpoint, which is a visual language
developer for instructions for use. His company worked on a Cooperative
Research and Development Agreement with the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health to determine if visual language could be used in
lieu of words on certain portions of device labeling.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                   Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
                                     Number of    responses      Total       Average    Total hours    Capital
        Type of respondent          respondents      per         annual     burden per      \1\         costs
                                                  respondent   responses     response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Screener..........................           60            1           60         0.08            5  ...........
Health care professionals                    24            1           24          1.5           36  ...........
 participating at a hospital......
Health care professionals                    12            1           12          3.5           42         $240
 participating at FDA.............
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........           83         $240
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers have been rounded.

    We plan to screen approximately 60 potential respondents prior to
being included in the study. The screener will be done using email. We
estimate that the screener will only take approximately 5 minutes per
person.
    We will conduct the studies at three different sites including two
area hospitals using their devices, existing labeling, and HCPs. We
expect that the maximum time for testing will be 1.5 hours. Given a
sample of 6 devices with 2 different labeling types, there will be 12
different labeling types to be tested. We plan to have 24 people test
each type of the labeling.
    We will also conduct the studies on FDA's campus using medical
devices received from medical device industry representatives through a
material transfer agreement. To account for travel time we have
included 2 additional hours per response in the burden estimate for the
12 health care professionals participating at FDA.

    Dated: March 31, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-07817 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28972-28973]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12297]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-303-000]

Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on April 28, 2011, Eastern Shore Natural Gas
Company (Eastern Shore), 1110 Forrest Avenue, Dover, Delaware, 19904,
pursuant to its blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP96-128-
000,\1\ filed an application in accordance to sections 157.205(b),
157.208(c), and 157.210 of the Commission's Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, for the construction, ownership, and
operation of new mainline facilities and a new delivery point
measurement and regulating station from Glasgow, Delaware to Elkton,
Maryland, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on
file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 81 FERC ] 61,013 (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide additional firm natural gas transportation
service to Chesapeake Utilities Corporation--Maryland Division
(Chesapeake), Eastern Shore proposes to construct, own, operate, and
maintain about 5 miles of new six-inch steel pipeline running westward
from Route 40 in Glasgow, Delaware to Elkton, Maryland, and install a
new delivery point measurement and regulating station near the
intersection of US 40 and Maryland 279 in Elkton, Maryland. Eastern
Shore has entered into a binding Precedent Agreement with Chesapeake in
which Chesapeake has agreed to execute a fifteen-year FT Service
Agreement with Eastern Shore to provide additional natural gas
transportation service of 4,070 dts/day under Eastern Shore's maximum
FT Zone One Tariff Rate on file with the Commission. Eastern Shore will
recover its project costs entirely from Chesapeake, with no subsidy
from Eastern Shore's other firm service customers. The total estimate
cost of the proposed facilities is $5,850,450. Eastern Shore proposes
the facilities to be completed and placed into service by November 1,
2011.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Glen
DiEleuterio, Project Manager, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, ext. 6723 or via fax
(302) 734-6745, or e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERC
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or, for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Comments, protests and interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18

CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
intervenors to file electronically.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Dated: May 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12297 Filed 5-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P