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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Notice of Filing of a Pesticide Petition for the Establishment of
Tolerances for Residues of Chlorantraniliprole in or on Food Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of tolerances for residues of
chlorantraniliprole in or on food commodities under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: [EPA Product Manager], Product
Manager (PM), Registration Division, (7505), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Washington, DC 20460.  Office location and
telephone number:                   , Arlington, VA.,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has received a pesticide petition as
follows proposing the establishment and/or amendment of regulations for
residues of certain pesticide chemicals in or on rice grain, rice straw,
rice hulls and crayfish under section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a (d). EPA has determined that
this petition contains data or information regarding the elements set
forth in section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the
sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data
supports granting of the petition.  Additional data may be needed before
EPA rules on the petition.

List of Subjects

Environmental Protection, Agricultural Commodities, Food Additives, Feed
Additives, Pesticides and Pests, Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements.

Summary of Petition

A summary of the pesticide petition is given below. The petitioner
prepared the summary of the petition.

EPA Registration Division contact: Product Manager, (703) XXX-XXXX

 E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, DuPont Crop Protection

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, DuPont Crop Protection, Wilmington,
Delaware, proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part
180 by establishing tolerances for residues of chlorantraniliprole,
3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chlor
o-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide in or on  the raw agricultural
and processed commodities: Acerola at 2 ppm; Almond, hull at 5 ppm;
Apple, wet pomace at 2.5 ppm; Artichoke at 4 ppm; Asparagus at 13 ppm;
Atemoya at 4 ppm; Avocado at 4 ppm; Banana at 4 ppm; Biriba at 4 ppm;
Black sapote at 4 ppm; Cacao bean, bean at  0.15 ppm; Cacao, roasted
beans at 1.4 ppm; Canistel at 4 ppm;  Cattle, fat at 0.3 ppm; Cattle,
liver at 0.3 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.05 ppm; Cattle, meat byproducts
except liver at 0.2 ppm; Cherimoya at 4 ppm; Chocolate at 3 ppm; Citrus,
dried pulp at 14 ppm; Cocoa powder at 3 ppm; Coffee, bean, green at 0.5
ppm; Coffee, instant at 2.5 ppm; Corn, sweet at 0.02 ppm; Corn, field,
grain at 0.04 ppm; Corn, pop at 0.04 ppm; Corn, aspirated grain
fractions at 2 ppm; Corn, processed commodities at 0.1 ppm; Crambe at
0.3 ppm; Crayfish at 8 ppm; Custard apple  at 4 ppm; Egg at 0.1 ppm;
Feijoa at 4 ppm; Figs at 4 ppm; Forage, fodder, and straw of cereal
grains, group 16, forage and fodder at 25 ppm; Forage, fodder, and straw
of cereal grains, group 16, hay and straw at 90 ppm; Fruit, caneberry,
subgroup 13-07A at 1.8 ppm; Fruit, citrus, group 10 at 1.4 ppm; Fruit,
pome, group 11 at 1.2 ppm; Fruit, small vine climbing, subgroup 13-07D
at 2.5 ppm; Fruit, stone, group 12 at 4 ppm; Goat, fat at 0.3 ppm; Goat,
liver at 0.3 ppm; Goat, meat at 0.05 ppm; Goat, meat byproducts, except
liver at 0.2 ppm; Grass forage, fodder and hay, group 17, forage and
fodder at 25 ppm; Grass forage, fodder and hay, group 17, hay and straw
at 90 ppm; Guava at 4 ppm; Hare's ear mustard at 0.3 ppm; Herbs and
spices, subgroup 19A, dried at 90 ppm; Herbs and spices, subgroup 19A,
fresh at 25 ppm; Herbs and spices, subgroup 19B, spices at 7 ppm; Hops
at 90 ppm; Horse, fat at 0.3 ppm; Horse, liver at 0.3 ppm; Horse, meat
at 0.05 ppm; Horse, meat byproducts, except liver at 0.2 ppm; Ilama at 4
ppm; Jaboticaba at 2 ppm; Jojoba at 0.3 ppm; Lesquerella at 0.3 ppm;
Longan at 4 ppm; Lunaria at 0.3 ppm; Lychee at 2 ppm; Mango at 4 ppm;
Milk at 0.05 ppm; Milkweed at 0.3 ppm; Mint at 9 ppm; Mustard at 0.3
ppm; Non-grass animal feeds, group 18, forage and fodder at 13 ppm;
Non-grass animal feeds, group 18, hay and straw at 45 ppm; Non-grass
animal feeds, group 18, seeds at 3.5 ppm; Nut, tree, group 14 at 0.04
ppm; Oil radish at 0.3 ppm; Okra at 0.7 ppm; Olive at 4 ppm; Olive, oil
at 40 ppm; Papaya at 2 ppm; Passionfruit at 2 ppm; Peanut at 0.1 ppm;
Peanut hay at 90 ppm; Persimmon at 4 ppm; Pineapple at 1.5 ppm;
Pineapple process residue at 3 ppm; Pistachio at 0.04 ppm; Pomegranate
at 4 ppm; Poppy seed at 0.3 ppm; Poultry, fat at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, meat
at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; Prickly pear cactus
at 13 ppm; Pulasan at 4 ppm; Raisins at 5 ppm; Rambutan at 4 ppm;
Rapeseed/canola at 0.3 ppm; Rice, grain at 0.15 ppm; Rice, hulls at 0.3
ppm; Rice, straw at 0.3 ppm; Rose hip at 0.3 ppm; Sapodilla at 4 ppm;
Sapote, mamey at 4 ppm; Sesame at 0.3 ppm; Sheep, fat at 0.3 ppm; Sheep,
liver at 0.3 ppm; Sheep, meat at 0.05 ppm; Sheep, meat byproducts,
except liver at 0.2 ppm; Soursop at 4 ppm; Spanish lime at 4 ppm; Star
apple at 4 ppm; Starfruit at 4 ppm; Strawberries at 1 ppm; Sugar apple
at 4 ppm; Sugarcane molasses at 420 ppm; Sugarcane, cane at 14 ppm;
Tallowwood at 0.3 ppm; Tea oil plant at 0.3 ppm; Ti palm, leaves at 13
ppm; Ti palm, roots at 0.1 ppm; Vegetables, Brassica leafy, group 5 at
11 ppm; Vegetables, foliage of legume, group 7, forage/vines at 30 ppm;
Vegetables, foliage of legume, group 7, hay at 90 ppm; Vegetables,
legume, group 6, except soybeans, at 2 ppm; Vegetables, tuberous and
corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm; Wax jambu at 4 ppm; White sapote
(casimiroa) and other cultivars and/or hybrids at 4 ppm.

	EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in section 408(d)(2) of the FFDCA;
however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted
data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the petition.
 Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

1. Plant metabolism.

The metabolism of chlorantraniliprole is adequately understood. Studies
in apple, lettuce, rice, tomato, and cotton when treated at proposed
label rates showed no significant metabolites.  The only significant
residue is the parent compound.

2. Livestock Metabolism.

The metabolism of chlorantraniliprole in ruminants and poultry is
adequately understood.  Lactating goat and laying hen metabolism studies
were conducted.  The goat and hen rapidly excreted >93% and >98% of the
dosed radiolabeled residues, respectively.

The metabolic pathway in poultry and ruminant (goat) animals was
consistent.

3. Analytical method.

Analytical methods were previously submitted which permit determination
of chlorantraniliprole residues in meat, milk, poultry and eggs at
appropriate detection levels.

4. Magnitude of residues.

Alfalfa

Fifteen trials (14 MOR, 1 decline) were conducted on alfalfa (Medicago
sativa) at the rate of 0.10 lb ai/A/application for two applications.
Two cuttings were made at each site. A second treated plot was
established at 13 of the 15 trial sites in which a single application
was made at approximately 5 to 7 days before commercial seed harvest.

Maximum residues of chlorantraniliprole found in replicate treated
alfalfa forage, hay, and seed samples collected at 0-day PHI were 11,
47, and 1.8 ppm, respectively. Residues were comparable in forage and
hay following the first application/cutting and the second
application/cutting. These data indicate the first application does not
carryover and impact residues in the raw commodities. By extrapolation,
even though only one application was made in these residue trials prior
to seed harvest, residues in seed would not be impacted by an earlier
application/cutting of alfalfa forage and/or hay prior to a second
application/cutting for seed harvest.

Caneberry

Eight residue field trials were conducted in the US and Canada.

Two foliar applications of 0.1 lb ai/A was applied to the treated plots.
 Commercially mature raspberries and blackberries were collected 3 days
after the last application. At one site, additional samples were
collected at 1, 7, and 10 days after the last application for a decline
study. The maximum residue in caneberry fruit was 0.543 ppm at the 3-day
PHI. In the decline study, maximum residues in caneberry at 1-, 3-, 7-,
and 10-day PHIs were 0.15, 0.0744, 0.0921, and 0.0671 ppm, respectively.

Coffee

Four MOR tests on coffee in Brazil were conducted with a
chlorantraniliprole 35WG formulation.  Three applications were made at
52.5 g ai/ha 14 days apart with samples collected at 7 and 21 days after
the last application (DALA).  Maximum residues determined in the green
coffee beans (dried coffee beans with hulls removed) at 21 DALA were
0.115 mg/kg.  Since the application rate in the US is proposed to be
110.5 g ai/ha, use of proportionality for the application rate and a
worst-case assumption that all residues are from the last application,
indicates maximum residues in green coffee beans treated according to
the US use pattern would be 0.24 mg/kg.

Dry Soybean

An MOR/decline study on field-grown soybeans was conducted in Japan.
The study was conducted at 2 sites making 3 applications at 25 g ai/ha
7 days apart and harvested 7 days after the final application.  Maximum
residues determined in the dried shelled soybeans were 0.03 mg/kg. Since
the application rate in the US is proposed to be 109.5 g ai/ha, use of
proportionality for the application rate indicates maximum residues in
dried, shelled beans would be 0.13 mg/kg.

Field Corn

Seven corn trials (5 MOR, 2 MOR/Processing) were conducted with
chlorantraniliprole on corn (Zea mays) as a foliar broadcast spray at
the rate of 0.10 lb ai/A/application.  At two of the seven test
locations, a foliar broadcast spray was applied at the rate of 0.50 lb
ai/A to generate grain samples.  This exaggerated rate corresponds to 5(
the maximum proposed use rate and the grain samples were analyzed to
determine if processing trials were necessary.  Two applications were
made to the treated plots at 7-day intervals with the last application
occurring approximately 14 days before normal grain and stover harvest.
Maximum residues of chlorantraniliprole found in 1(-treated corn forage
collected 1 day after Application 2 and 1(-treated corn grain and
stover samples collected 14 days (( 1) after Application 2 were 3.1,
0.12, and 5.3 ppm, respectively.  Maximum residues of
chlorantraniliprole found in aspirated grain fractions generated from
1(-treated corn grain collected 14 days (( 1) after Application 2 were
0.34 ppm.  Maximum residues of chlorantraniliprole found in 5(-treated
corn grain collected 14 days (( 1) after Application 2 were 0.004 ppm.

Green Beans

Field studies with chlorantraniliprole on field and protected green
beans (fresh legume vegetables) with two applications of foliar
broadcast sprays on 7-day intervals at the targeted rate of 40 g
ai/ha, for a nominal seasonal application rate of 80 g ai/ha.  At the
protected green bean tests, there was a target application rate of 60 g
ai/ha for each of two applications, 7-days apart, for a nominal seasonal
application rate of 120 g ai/ha.

Maximum chlorantraniliprole residues in field and protected green bean
edible pods were 0.25 and 0.30 mg/kg at 1 day after the last
application.

Green Soybean

Field-grown soybeans were treated at 2 sites with 3 applications at 25
g ai/ha 7 days apart with a 3-day PHI for green soybeans (in pods).
Maximum residues determined in the green soybeans (in pods) were 0.32
mg/kg. Since the application rate in the US is proposed to be 109.5 g
ai/ha, use of proportionality for the application rate indicates maximum
residues in edible-podded beans in the US would be 1.4 ppm.

Japanese radish roots and tops

Turnip roots and tops

Field-grown Japanese radishes and turnips were treated with 3
applications at 50 g ai/ha 7 days apart and harvested 1-day post
application.  Maximum residues determined in the roots and tops were
0.03 and 3.36 ppm, respectively.  Residues were higher in the turnip
roots than in the Japanese radish roots.  Since the application rate in
the US is proposed to be 109.5 g ai/ha, use of proportionality for the
application rate indicates maximum residues in roots and tops in the US
would be 0.07 and 7.4 ppm, respectively.

Mint

Five sites were treated twice with 0.1 lb ai/A chlorantraniliprole.
Commercially mature mint tops (leaves and stems) were collected 3 days
after the final application. Oil was steam distilled from additional
samples.

The maximum residues in mint tops were 6.24 ppm. No residues above the
detection limit (0.01 ppm) were observed in mint oil.

Polebeans

Polebeans (an edible-podded bean) were treated with 6 applications at 20
g ai/ha 5 days apart and harvested 1 day following the last application.
 Residues determined in the pole beans were 0.057 mg/kg.  Since the
application rate in the US is proposed to be 109.5 g ai/ha, use of
proportionality for the application rate and a worst-case assumption
that all residues are from the last application, indicates residues in
edible-podded beans in the US would be 0.31 mg/kg.

Rice

The active ingredient was applied as a seed treatment at a use rate of
0.10 mg ai/seed (10.3 fl oz fp/100 lb seed) approximately 2x the
maximum proposed seed treatment rate at 16 locations.  The target
seeding rate of 120 lb seed/acre resulted in treatment rates of 560 g
ai/ha (0.50 lb ai/acre) approximately 4x the maximum proposed
application rate.  Rice grain and straw were harvested at maturity with
PHIs ranging from 113 to 148 days.  Average rice grain residues for the
sixteen trials were 0.045 ppm with a maximum residue of 0.087 ppm and a
highest average field trial (HAFT) of 0.086 ppm.  Average rice straw
residues for the sixteen trials were 0.12 ppm with a maximum residue of
0.25 ppm.

Two trials were completed to determine residues in processed rice
commodities.  The active ingredient was applied as a seed treatment at a
use rate of 0.20 mg ai/seed approximately 4x the maximum proposed seed
treatment rate.  The target seeding rate of 120 lb seed/acre resulted in
treatment rates of 1120 g ai/ha (1.0 lb ai/acre) approximately 8x the
maximum proposed ground rate.  Rice grain was harvested at maturity with
PHIs ranging from 120 to 148 days.  Chlorantraniliprole residues in
polished rice produced by mechanical processing with or without
parboiling were reduced (all samples had <0.010 mg/kg residues) relative
to the unprocessed grain with an average processing factor of 0.12.
Chlorantraniliprole residues in bran and hulls produced by mechanical
processing with or without parboiling concentrated relative to the
unprocessed grain with average processing factors of 1.7 and 3.4,
respectively.

Strawberry

Strawberries were treated at 2 sites with 2 applications at 50 g ai/ha 7
days apart and harvested 1 day post application.  Maximum residues
determined in the strawberries were 0.30 mg/kg.  Since the application
rate in the US is proposed to be 110.5 g ai/ha, use of proportionality
for the application rate, indicates maximum residues in strawberries in
the US would be 0.66 mg/kg.

Sweet Corn

Fourteen sweet corn field trials were treated with four foliar
applications at a rate of approximately 0.1 lb ai/A each, for a total of
approximately 0.4 lb ai/A (one location received a fifth application of
0.1 lb ai/A was made for a total of 0.5 lb ai/A). The first two
applications were made approximately 1 day apart and timed so that corn
could be harvested at the milk stage, in the form of forage and kernels
plus cob with husks removed (K+CWHR) at a 1-day PHI. These samples
represent the sweet corn RACs.

The last two applications were made 7(±1) days apart so that
commercially mature field corn RACs could be collected in the form of
stover and grain at a 14(±1) day PHI. In one case, the second
application was mistakenly done 12 days after the first; an extra
application was scheduled for two days after the second application and
one day before the first harvest, to correct the oversight. The results
from the trials show that the maximum residues of chlorantraniliprole in
forage and kernels plus cob with husks removed were 6.46 and <0.01 ppm,
respectively.  The maximum residues found on field grain and on stover
were 0.0159 ppm and 14.4 ppm, respectively.

Tea

A tea magnitude of residues study was conducted at 2 sites with 1
application at 200 g ai/ha.  Samples were collected at 3, 7, 14, and 21
days after the application.  The tea plants were covered with
cheesecloth for the final 10 days prior to harvest. Maximum residues
determined in dried tea leaves at the target 3-day PHI were 39 mg/kg.
Since the seasonal application rate in the US is proposed to be 219 g
ai/ha, use of proportionality for the application rate, indicates
maximum residues in dried tea in the US would be 43 mg/kg at a 3-day
PHI.  Extrapolating these residues based on an average decline rate
indicates maximum residues in dried tea in the US would be 53 mg/kg at
a 1-day PHI.

Turnip roots and tops

Data are summarized above in conjunction with the Japanese radish roots
and tops data.

Crayfish

Estimated chlorantraniliprole residues in whole crayfish farmed in rice
paddies planted with treated rice seed at the maximum rate are
3.75 mg/kg.  These estimated residues support an MRL/tolerance of 8
mg/kg in crayfish.

Livestock

Mammalian: Based on the cattle feeding study and the estimated dietary
burdens for cattle and swine, DuPont proposes MRLs/tolerances for
livestock commodities and provides estimates of residues in livestock
commodities to be used in dietary risk assessment.

The highest cattle and swine dietary burdens are estimated to be 2.1 and
0.078 mg chlorantraniliprole/kg bw/day (54.4 and 2.5 mg/kg feed)
calculated for dairy cows and swine in Canada and the United States.  In
the cattle feeding study, dosing was made at target levels of 1 mg/kg
feed, 3 mg/kg feed, 10 mg/kg feed and 50 mg/kg feed in the animal diet
on a dry weight basis.  The estimated swine dietary burden (2.5 mg/kg
feed) is well represented by the feeding levels studied and the
estimated highest cattle dietary burden (54.4 mg/kg feed) is not
significantly higher than the highest feeding level of 50 mg/kg.  Thus,
these dietary burdens and the residues observed in the cattle feeding
study were used to estimate residues and propose tolerances for cattle,
goat, horse, sheep, and swine commodities.

No MRLs/tolerances are proposed for swine commodities.

MRLs/tolerances of 0.3, 0.3, 0.2, 0.05, and 0.05 mg/kg are proposed in
cattle fat, liver, kidney, muscle, and milk, respectively. These
MRLs/tolerances should also be applied to goat, horse, and sheep
commodities.

MRLs/tolerances should be used for worst-case dietary risk assessment
for mammalian fat, liver, kidney, and muscle.

Milk residues of 0.15 mg/kg are proposed for worst-case dietary risk
assessment.

Poultry

A poultry feeding study will not provide additional useful information
for dietary risk assessment, MRL/tolerance proposals or residue
definition and, therefore, the poultry feeding study should be waived.

The poultry metabolism study was conducted by dosing laying hens at 0.87
mg/kg body weight (bw)/day (10.311 mg/kg feed equivalents/day),
approximately 5X the estimated dietary burden of 0.17 mg
chlorantraniliprole/kg bw (2.706 mg/kg feed) for 14 consecutive days.
The total radioactive residues in the eggs were at steady state levels
after 7-9 days and major radioactive compounds were identified and
quantified in the eggs and tissues.  The interpolated residue levels for
1X dietary burden using the results from the metabolism study are
adequate for defining the residue for dietary risk assessment, setting
MRLs/tolerances, and estimating residues for use in dietary risk
assessment.

The residue definition for dietary risk assessment for eggs is proposed
to include only chlorantraniliprole and IN-GAZ70.

MRLs/tolerances of 0.1 and 0.02 mg/kg are proposed in eggs and poultry
commodities except eggs, respectively.  Residues for worst-case dietary
risk assessment of 0.25 and 0.02 mg/kg are proposed in eggs and poultry
commodities except eggs, respectively.

B. Toxicological Profile

Acute toxicity.

Based on EPA criteria, chlorantraniliprole is classified as follows for
Toxicity Categories:

	Guideline	Title	Results	Category

870.1100

870.1200

870.1300

870.2400

870.2500

870.2600	Acute Oral Toxicity

Acute Dermal Toxicity

Acute Inhalation Toxicity

Primary Eye Irritation

Primary Dermal Irritation

Skin Sensitization	LD50: >5,000 mg/kg (Rat)

LD50: >5,000 mg/kg (Rat)

LC50: >5.1 mg/L (Rat)

Mild irritation (Rabbit)

No irritation (Rabbit)

Not a sensitizer (Mouse LLNA and GP Maximization)	Category IV

Category IV

Category IV

Category IV

Category IV

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

	Formulated products are as equally low in toxicity following acute
exposures as is technical chlorantraniliprole.  The acute inhalation
toxicity for the suspension concentrate formulation could not be
determined above the maximum practically attainable atmospheric aerosol
concentration of 2 mg/L.

	There was no evidence of neurotoxicity in rats following a single limit
dose of 2,000 mg/kg.

	2. Genotoxicty.  Chlorantraniliprole has shown no genotoxic activity in
the following listed in vitro and in vivo tests:

Bacterial reverse mutation

In vitro mammalian gene mutation (CHO/HGPRT)

In vitro chromosomal aberration (human lymphocytes)

In vivo mouse micronucleus

3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity.

	In developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits,
chlorantraniliprole exhibited no effects on any parameter in pregnant
females or their offspring at levels up to and including the maximum
tested dose of 1,000 mg/kg bw/day.

	No reproductive toxicity was observed in a two-generation reproduction
study with chlorantraniliprole in rats.  No adverse effects were
observed on reproduction, fertility, sperm parameters, estrous cycle,
litter size, pup survival and developmental landmarks up to the maximum
tested dose of 20,000 ppm in the diet.  There were no adverse
histological findings indicative of reproductive toxicity.  There was a
slight reduction in the F1 pup (but not F2 pup) weight during lactation
at the highest dose level (mean maternal intake during lactation equal
to 3,118 mg/kg bw/day); this was attributed, in part, to weight loss in
one dehydrated dam during lactation which had a litter with some of the
lowest pup weights.  The slight change in pup weight was without
subsequent effects since overall body weight, weight gain and
development in F1 rats fed 20,000 ppm were similar to control animals.

	4. Subchronic toxicity.

	Subchronic (90-day) feeding studies were conducted with rats, mice and
dogs. No adverse effects were observed at the highest dietary
concentrations tested of 20,000 ppm in rats (1,188 mg/kg bw/day for
males and 1,526 mg/kg bw/day for females), 7,000 ppm in mice (1,135
mg/kg bw/day for males and 1,539 mg/kg bw/day for females) and 40,000
ppm in dogs (1,163 mg/kg bw/day for males and 1,220 mg/kg bw/day for
females).  Chlorantraniliprole showed no evidence of immunotoxicity in
28-day feeding studies in rats or mice and no evidence of neurotoxicity
in a 90-day feeding study in rats at dietary concentrations greater than
the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg bw/day.

	A 28-day dermal toxicity study in rats was conducted at doses of 100,
300 and 1,000 mg/kg bw/day.  Although reductions in body weight gain and
food efficiency occurred at the high dose, overall body weight was
unaffected.  Therefore, the NOAEL for male and female rats was 1000
mg/kg bw/day.

		No adverse target organ effects were observed in any subchronic
toxicity study.

5. Chronic toxicity.

	Chlorantraniliprole was not carcinogenic in either a 2-year study in
rats or an 18-month study in mice.  The NOAEL for chronic toxicity in
the 18-month mouse study was 1,200 ppm (158 mg/kg bw/day in males) and
was based on eosinophilic foci in the liver accompanied by
hepatocellular hypertrophy and increased liver weight.

	In rats, there were no adverse effects on any parameter in either males
or females administered chlorantraniliprole up to and including a
maximum dietary concentration of 20,000 ppm for 2 years (805 and 1,076
mg/kg bw/day, respectively).

	In a one-year feeding study in dogs, the NOAEL was the highest dose
tested, 40,000 ppm (1,164 and 1,233 mg/kg/day in males and females,
respectively).

	6. Rat metabolism.

The absorption of [14C]-chlorantraniliprole in rats was rapid with peak
concentrations occurring at 5-12 hours after single dose administration.
Tissue distribution of the absorbed dose was extensive and indicated low
potential for accumulation.  Excretion was substantially complete by
48-72 hours after dosing (>90%).

Following 14 days of oral administration 14C residues were readily
eliminated from the plasma and tissues and confirmed minimal potential
for accumulation. The profile of metabolites in urine and feces
indicated extensive metabolism consistent with that observed for the
single dose study.

	7. Metabolite toxicology.

Due to the extremely low toxicity of the parent compound and the
extensive metabolism observed in mammalian systems, chlorantraniliprole
metabolites are not expected to result in any significant toxicity.
Toxicology studies conducted with metabolites support this conclusion.

	8. Endocrine disruption.

No adverse effects were observed on any endocrine tissue in short- and
long-term studies in rats, mice and dogs.

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure –

i. Food.

Because an endpoint attributable to a single dose was not identified,
the dietary exposure assessment considered only chronic exposure.

Chronic dietary exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM-FCID™, Version 2.03) which uses food
consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Continuing
Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) from 1994-1996 and 1998.
The chronic dietary exposure assessment was conducted using a chronic
reference dose of 1.58 mg/kg bw/day based on the NOAEL established in
the 18-month study in mice.  DuPont has conducted chronic assessments
which assume that 100% of all crops – including those not labeled -
are treated with chlorantraniliprole and that all crops contain residues
at tolerance level or at residue levels equal to tolerance levels for
similar crops.  In particular all leafy vegetables, including leaves of
root and tuber vegetables and leafy vegetables including brassica
vegetables, are assumed to have residues of 15 parts per million.  All
other human foods (including plant and animal commodities) are assumed
to have residues of 2 parts per million.

These assumptions result in conservative, health-protective estimates of
exposure which are well below the Agency’s level of concern (100% of
the cPAD). The maximum estimate is less than 11% of the cPAD for all
population subgroups.

ii. Drinking water.

A drinking water assessment for chlorantraniliprole, conducted based on
PRZM/EXAMS (Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System), was used to calculate the surface water estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) and the Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI-GROW) model was used to calculate the groundwater EDWC. The
EDWCs do not exceed the Agency’s level of concern.

	2. Non-dietary exposure.

Residential exposure (non-occupational, non-dietary exposure to
consumers) was conservatively assessed for dermal post-application
exposure (children and adults), and for children the oral exposures via
hand-to-mouth, object-to-mouth, and incidental ingestion of soil were
also assessed.  The margins of exposure (MOE) greatly exceed the
100-fold MOE required for these routes and from the combined
children’s incidental oral ingestion.  Therefore, residential
non-dietary exposure is not a concern.

D. Cumulative Effects

It is not necessary at this time to consider cumulative effects because
there is no indication that toxic effects of chlorantraniliprole have a
common mechanism with those of any other chemical compounds.

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population.

Based on risk assessments performed using worst-case exposure
assumptions there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
the general population from the aggregate exposure to
chlorantraniliprole.  No additional safety factors are warranted.

	2. Infants and children.

Based on the risk assessments performed using worst-case exposure
assumptions there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
the infants and children from the aggregate exposure to
chlorantraniliprole.  No additional safety factors are warranted.

F. International Tolerances

Numerous MRLs have been established or are soon expected be established
on other crops in the European Union, Australia and Canada.  Codex MRLs
for chlorantraniliprole on various crops are being sought.

E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company
             	Chlorantraniliprole

h¿

h

h

h

h

h

 h¿

耀Ȇ

B*

B*

	Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  12


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30069-30072]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12545]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0277]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Lake Gaston,
Enterprise, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishment of Special Local
Regulations for ``The Crossing'' swim event, to be held on the waters
of Lake Gaston, adjacent to the Eaton Ferry Bridge in Enterprise, North
Carolina. This Special Local Regulation is necessary to provide for the
safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is
intended to restrict vessel traffic on Lake Gaston under the Eaton
Ferry Bridge and within 100 yards east of the bridge during the swim
event.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 23, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0277 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail BOSN3 Joseph M. Edge, Coast Guard Sector North
Carolina, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2011-0277), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2011-0277'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit
them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and
would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-0277'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.

Basis and Purpose

    On August 13, 2011 from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The Organization to
Support the Arts, Infrastructure, and Learning on Lake Gaston, also
known as O'SAIL, will sponsor ``The Crossing'' on the waters of Lake
Gaston, adjacent to Enterprise, North Carolina. The swim event will
consist of approximately 200 swimmers entering Lake Gaston at the
Morning Star Marina on the north bank of Lake Gaston, east of the Eaton
Ferry Bridge, and swimming south along the eastern side of Eaton Ferry
Bridge to the Waterview Restaurant. A fleet of spectator vessels are
expected to gather near the event site to view the competition. To
provide for the safety of the participants, spectators and other
transiting vessels, the Coast Guard will temporarily restrict vessel
traffic in the event area during this event.
    In an effort to enhance safety of event participants the channel in
the vicinity of Eaton Ferry Bridge will remain closed during event on
August 13, 2011 from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The Coast Guard will
temporarily restrict access to this section of Lake Gaston during the
event.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish Special Local Regulations
that will restrict vessel movement on the specified waters of Lake
Gaston, Enterprise, NC. During the Marine Event no vessel will be
allowed to transit the waterway unless the vessel is given permission
from the Patrol Commander to transit.

    The Special Local Regulation will encompass the waters of Lake
Gaston under the Eaton Ferry Bridge, latitude 36[deg]31'06'' North,
longitude 077[deg]57'37'' West, and within 100 yards of the eastern
side of Eaton Ferry Bridge. All vessels are prohibited from transiting
this section of the waterway while the regulation is in effect. Entry
into the regulated area will not be permitted except as specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.
To request permission to transit the area, mariners may contact Coast
Guard Sector North Carolina at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The regulated area will
be enforced from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on August 13, 2011. This proposed
restriction on vessel movement on and access to this waterway is aimed
at protecting the safety of the swimmers participating in the event.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under that those Orders.
    Although this regulation will restrict access to the area, the
effect of this rule will not be significant because the regulated area
will be in effect for a limited time, from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m., on
August 13, 2011. The Coast Guard will give advance notification via
maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly, and
the regulated area will apply only to the section of Lake Gaston in the
immediate vicinity of the Eaton Ferry Bridge. Coast Guard vessels
enforcing this regulated area can be contacted on marine band radio
VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of recreational vessels
intending to transit the specified portion of Lake Gaston from 8:30
a.m. to 12 p.m. on August 13, 2011.
    This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule will only be in effect for 3 and one-half hours from 8:30 a.m. to
12 p.m. The regulated area applies only to the section of Lake Gaston
in the vicinity of the Eaton Ferry Bridge and traffic may be allowed to
pass through the regulated area with the permission of the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander. In the case where the Patrol Commander authorizes
passage through the regulated area, vessels shall proceed at the
minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that minimizes wake
near the swim course. The Patrol Commander will allow non-participating
vessels to transit the event area once all swimmers are safely clear of
navigation channels and vessel traffic areas. Before the enforcement
period, we will issue maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their
plans accordingly.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact CWO3 Joseph Edge, Waterways
Management Division Chief, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina, at (252)
247-4525. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities
that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive

Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination, under figure 2-1, paragraph
34(h) of the Instruction, that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. A preliminary environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule involves
implementation of regulations within 33 CFR Part 100 that apply to
organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States
that may have potential for negative impact on the safety or other
interest of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area.
This special local regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of
the general public and event participants from potential hazards
associated with movement of vessels near the event area. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

    1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35-T05-0277 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35-T05-0277  Lake Gaston, Enterprise, NC.

    (a) Regulated area. The following location is a regulated area: All
waters of of Lake Gaston directly under the Eaton Ferry Bridge,
latitude 36[deg]31'06'' North, longitude 077[deg]57'37'' West, and
within 100 yards of the eastern side of the bridge at Enterprise, North
Carolina. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has
been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.
    (2) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina with a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
    (3) Participant means all vessels participating in the ``The
Crossing'' swim event under the auspices of the Marine Event Permit
issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast Guard
Sector North Carolina.
    (4) Spectator means all persons and vessels not registered with the
event sponsor as participants or official patrol.
    (c) Special local regulations: (1) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander
may forbid and control the movement of all vessels in the vicinity of
the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol
vessel, a vessel approaching the regulated area shall immediately
comply with the directions given. Failure to do so may result in
termination of voyage and citation for failure to comply.
    (2) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander may terminate the event, or
the operation of any support vessel participating in the event, at any
time it is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property. The
Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the
regulated area by other Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (3) Vessel traffic, not involved with the event, may be allowed to
transit the regulated area with the permission of the Patrol Commander.
Vessels that desire passage through the regulated area shall contact
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander on VHF-FM marine band radio for
direction. Only participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to
enter the regulated area.
    (4) All Coast Guard vessels enforcing the regulated area can be
contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and
channel 22 (157.1 MHz). The Coast Guard will issue marine information
broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event date
and times.
    (d) Enforcement period: This section will be enforced from 8:30
a.m. to 12 p.m. on August 13, 2011.

    Dated: April 18, 2011.
A. Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2011-12545 Filed 5-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 173 (Thursday, September 8, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54919-54922]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19273]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1058; Project Identifier AD-2022-00256-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2021-07-09, which applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400,
747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. AD 2021-07-09
requires repetitively inspecting all trim air diffuser ducts or
sidewall riser duct assemblies (collectively referred to as TADDs) for
damage, including repetitive structural inspections of the center fuel
tanks for damage, and applicable on-condition actions. Since the FAA
issued AD 2021-07-09, the agency has determined that the existing
requirements do not adequately address the unsafe condition. This
proposed AD would continue to require repetitive inspections of the
TADDs for damage with revised compliance times, and repair if
applicable. This proposed AD would also require repetitive replacement
of the TADDs and would remove the structural inspections of the center
fuel tanks. This proposed AD would also prohibit the installation of
affected parts. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 24,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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 Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet myboeingfleet.com. You may view this
service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available at regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1058.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1058; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole S. Tsang, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Section, FAA, Seattle ACO
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-
231-3959; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-1058; Project Identifier
AD-2022-00256-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Nicole S. Tsang, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental
Systems Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives that is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2021-07-09, Amendment 39-21486 (86 FR 17899,
April 7, 2021) (AD 2021-07-09), for all The Boeing Company Model 747-
100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300,
747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. AD
2021-07-09 was prompted by reports of sealant deteriorating on the
outside of the center wing fuel tank and analysis showing that sealant
may deteriorate inside the tank due to excess heat from TADDs. AD 2021-
07-09 was also prompted by reports indicating that the high temperature
composite material TADD failed. AD 2021-07-09 requires replacing
original fiberglass fabric material with high temperature composite
material TADDs, repetitively inspecting the TADDs for damage, and as
applicable inspecting the center wing fuel tank secondary fuel barrier
coating and primary sealant for damage, and repairing damage. The
agency issued AD 2021-07-09 to address potential hot air leakage from
original fiberglass fabric material or high temperature composite
material TADD that can cause damage to the center wing fuel tank
secondary fuel barrier coating and primary sealant, which can cause
fuel leakage into an ignition zone, possibly resulting in a fire or
explosion.

Actions Since AD 2021-07-09 Was Issued

    The FAA issued AD 2021-07-09 as an interim action and indicated
that the FAA might consider additional rulemaking. Since AD 2021-07-09
was issued, Boeing received further data from operators complying with
AD 2021-07-09 and continued to investigate the unsafe condition. Based
on the information Boeing received, the FAA has determined that the
existing requirements do not adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022. This service information specifies
procedures for repetitive detailed inspections for damage of TADDs made
of original fiberglass fabric material and high temperature composite
material, repetitive replacement of TADDs, and repair of damaged TADDs.
    The FAA also reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-21A2577,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022. This service information specifies,
among other things, the list of original fiberglass fabric material
TADD assembly part numbers in Appendix A of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-21A2577, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, and a list of
high temperature composite material TADD assembly part numbers in
Appendix B of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-21A2577, Revision 1,
dated March 9, 2022. Appendix A and Appendix B of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-21A2577, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, were not
included in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB, Revision
1, dated March 9, 2022. The parts listed in Appendix A are affected
parts that are prohibited from installation.
    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.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the
requirements of AD 2021-07-09, this proposed AD would retain certain
requirements of AD 2021-07-09. Those requirements are referenced in the
service information identified previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD;

that service information, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of
this proposed AD. This proposed AD would continue to require repetitive
inspections of the TADDs for damage (loose connection between a TADD
and the adjacent duct, delamination, removed surface material, softened
material, or blackened material on the TADD surface that can be easily
rubbed off by hand) with revised compliance times, and repair if
applicable. For certain airplane configurations, the TADDs' repetitive
inspection intervals were reduced from 3,600 flight hours to 1,200
flight hours if the number of flight hours since the TADD replacement
are not known. For airplanes with certain configurations and certain
conditions, the TADDs' repetitive inspection intervals were increased
from 1,200 flight hours after replacement to 16,000 flight hours after
replacement. This proposed AD would also require repetitive replacement
of the TADDs and would remove the structural inspections of the center
fuel tanks. In addition, this proposed AD would also prohibit the
installation of affected parts.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-1058.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 104 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
            Action                  Labor cost            Parts cost         Cost per  product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained repetitive             Up to 44 work-     $0......................  Up to $3,740 per   Up to $388,960
 inspections (AD2021-07-09).     hours x $85 per                              inspection cycle.  per inspection
                                 hour = up to                                                    cycle.
                                 $3,740 per
                                 inspection cycle.
Repetitive TADD replacement...  Up to 49 work-     Up to $12,000...........  Up to $16,165 per  Up to $1,681,160
                                 hours x $85 per                              inspection cycle.  per replacement
                                 hour = $4,165                                                   cycle.
                                 per replacement
                                 cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repairs specified in this proposed AD.
    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of
this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the
cost impact on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has determined that this 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 that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2021-07-09, Amendment 39-21486
(86 FR 17899, April 7, 2021), and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2022-1058; Project Identifier AD-
2022-00256-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by October 24, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2021-07-09, Amendment 39-21486 (86 FR 17899,
April 7, 2021) (AD 2021-07-09).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400,
747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated
in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 21, Air
conditioning.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of sealant deteriorating on the
outside of the center wing fuel tank and analysis showing that
sealant could deteriorate inside the fuel tank due to excess heat
from trim air diffuser ducts or sidewall riser duct assemblies
(collectively referred to as TADDs), and by the determination that
existing requirements do not adequately address the unsafe
condition. The FAA is issuing this AD to address potential hot air
leakage from original fiberglass fabric material or high temperature
composite material TADDs that can cause damage to the center wing
fuel tank secondary fuel barrier coating and primary sealant, which
can cause fuel leakage into an ignition zone, possibly resulting in
a fire or explosion.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB, Revision 1, dated March
9, 2022, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance
with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-21A2577, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, which is referred to
in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB, Revision 1,
dated March 9, 2022.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where the Compliance Time column of the tables in the
``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-
21A2577 RB, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, uses the phrase ``the
Revision 1 date of Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB,'' this AD
requires using ``the effective date of this AD.''
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, specifies contacting Boeing for
repair instructions: This AD requires doing the repair before
further flight using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, refers to ``new high temperature
composite material TADD,'' for this AD high temperature composite
material TADD is defined as the list of TADDs, indicated by part
numbers, in Appendix B of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-21A2577,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022.
    (4) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-21A2577 RB,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, refers to ``original fiberglass
fabric material TADD,'' for this AD, original fiberglass fabric
material TADD is defined as the list of TADDs, indicated by part
numbers, in Appendix A of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-21A2577,
Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an
original fiberglass fabric material TADD assembly, having a part
number listed in Appendix A of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
21A2577, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, on any airplane.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
747-21A2577 RB, dated February 18, 2020, which was incorporated by
reference in AD 2021-07-09.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office,
as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of
the certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2021-07-09 are approved as AMOCs for
the corresponding provisions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
747-21A2577 RB, Revision 1, dated March 9, 2022, that are required
by paragraph (g) of this AD.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nicole S. Tsang,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Section,
FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110 SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on August 17, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-19273 Filed 9-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68304-68306]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1163; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-022-AD;
Amendment 39-16857; AD 2011-23-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sicma Aero Seat Passenger Seat
Assemblies, Installed on, But Not Limited to, ATR-GIE Avions de
Transport R[eacute]gional Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Sicma
Aero Seat Model 9401, 9402, 9404, 9405, 9406, 9407, 9408, and 9409
series passenger seat assemblies, installed on, but not limited to,
ATR-GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Model ATR42 and ATR72
airplanes. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Several occurrences of cracked central and lateral spreaders on
passenger seats models 9401 and 9402 * * *.
    This condition, if not corrected, can lead to further cracking
of the seat spreaders, causing injury to passengers or crew members
during heavy turbulence in flight or in the event of an emergency
landing.
* * * * *

    This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 21, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 21,
2011.
    We must receive comments on this AD by December 19, 2011.

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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0097, dated May 20, 2008 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Several occurrences of cracked central and lateral spreaders on
passenger seats models 9401 and 9402 have been reported to Sicma
Aero Seat.
    This condition, if not corrected, can lead to further cracking
of the seat spreaders, causing injury to passengers or crew members
during heavy turbulence in flight or in the event of an emergency
landing.
    For the reasons stated above, this [EASA] Airworthiness
Directive (AD) requires repetitive [detailed] inspections of the
affected seats and, depending on findings, the repair or replacement
of damaged spreaders with an improved design (`Amendment B'
standard). The replacement of all spreaders (i.e. modification to
`Amendment B' standard) terminates the repetitive inspection
requirements.
* * * * *

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Sicma Aero Seat has issued the following service information. The
actions described in this service information are intended to correct
the

unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.
     Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-011, Revision 3,
dated June 30, 2008.
     Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-012, Revision 1,
dated June 26, 2008.
     Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-013, Issue 4, dated
February 12, 2008.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This 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 the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    There are no products of this type currently registered in the
United States. However, this rule is necessary to ensure that the
described unsafe condition is addressed if any of these products are
placed on the U.S. Register in the future.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product,
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
unnecessary.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-1163; Directorate
Identifier 2011-NM-022-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD 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 AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ''significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 adding the following new AD:

2011-23-06 Sicma Aero Seat: Amendment 39-16857. Docket No. FAA-2011-
23-06; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-022-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective November
21, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Sicma Aero Seat Model 9401, 9402, 9404,
9505, 9406, 9407, 9408, and 9409 series passenger seat assemblies,
all part numbers, except front row and aft facing seats, and those
modified to ``Amendment B'' standard. These passenger seat
assemblies are installed on, but not limited to, ATR-GIE Avions de
Transport R[eacute]gional Model ATR42-200, -300, -320, and -500
airplanes and Model ATR72-101, -201, -102, -202, -211, -212, and -
212A airplanes.

    Note 1:  This AD applies to Sicma Aero Seat passenger seat
assemblies as installed on any airplane, regardless of whether the
airplane has been otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the
area subject to the requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have
been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the
requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) according to
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. The request should include an
assessment of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair
on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe
condition has not been eliminated, the request should include
specific proposed actions to address it.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25:
Equipment/Furnishings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Several occurrences of cracked central and lateral spreaders on
passenger seats models 9401 and 9402 * * *.
    This condition, if not corrected, can lead to further cracking
of the seat spreaders, causing injury to passengers or crew members
during heavy turbulence in flight or in the event of an emergency
landing.
* * * * *

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Repetitive Inspections, Repair, and Replacement

    (g) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, perform
a detailed inspection for cracking of the central and lateral
spreaders of the affected seats, in accordance with paragraph 2/A1.,
``Checking procedures of lateral and central spreaders,'' of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-
25-013, Issue 4, dated February 12, 2008.
    (1) If no cracking is found on any central spreader, repeat the
detailed inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 550 flight
hours until the replacement specified in paragraph (h) of this AD is
done.
    (2) If no cracking or only cracks that are shorter than 8
millimeters (mm) (0.315 inch) are found on any lateral spreader,
repeat the detailed inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed
550 flight hours until the replacement specified in paragraph (h) of
this AD is done.
    (3) If all cracks found on any central spreader are shorter than
8 mm (0.315 inch), before further flight, repair the affected
spreader, in accordance with paragraphs 2/A through C2. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-
25-011, Revision 3, dated June 30, 2008. Within 550 flight hours
after doing the repair, do the detailed inspection specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, and repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 550 flight hours until the replacement
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD is done.
    (4) If one or more cracks are found that are 8 mm (0.315 inch)
or longer on any lateral or central spreader, before further flight,
replace the affected spreader, in accordance with paragraphs 2/A
through D2. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Sicma Aero Seat
Service Bulletin 94-25-012, Revision 1, dated June 26, 2008.

Optional Terminating Action

    (h) Replacing all central and lateral spreaders on an affected
seat assembly (modify to ``Amendment B'' standard), in accordance
with paragraphs 2/A through D2. of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-012, Revision 1, dated
June 26, 2008, terminates the inspections required by this AD for
that seat assembly.

 Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (i) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-011, Issue 2,
dated November 6, 2007; and Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-
012, dated September 25, 2007; are acceptable for compliance with
the corresponding actions of this AD.

Parts Installation

    (j) As of 6 months after the effective date of this AD, no
person may install any passenger seat assembly identified in
paragraph (c) of this AD, on any airplane, unless it has been
modified to ``Amendment B'' standard in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-
25-012, Revision 1, dated June 26, 2008.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (k) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 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 ACO,
send it to Attn: Jeffrey Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Boston Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 238-
7161; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<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) 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.

Related Information

    (l) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2008-0097, dated May 20,
2008; Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-011, Revision 3, dated
June 30, 2008; Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-012, Revision
1, dated June 26, 2008; and Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-
013, Issue 4, dated February 12, 2008; for related information.
    (m) Contact Jeffrey Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Boston Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 238-
7161; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for more
information about this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (n) You must use Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 94-25-011,
Revision 3, dated June 30, 2008; Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin
94-25-012, Revision 1, dated June 26, 2008; and Sicma Aero Seat
Service Bulletin 94-25-013, Issue 4, dated February 12, 2008; as
applicable; to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Sicma
Aero Seat, 7 Rue Lucien Coupet, 36100 ISSOUDUN, France, telephone:
+33 (0) 2 54 03 39 39; fax: +33 (0) 2 54 03 39 00; email
Customerservices.sas @zodiacaerospace.com; Internet http://www.sicma.zodiacaerospace.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 20, 2011.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-28357 Filed 11-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P