30436 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA–2022–0522; 

Project Identifier MCAI–2022–00340–T. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) by July 5, 2022. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus SAS airplanes 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this 

AD, certificated in any category, as identified 

in European Union Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) AD 2022–0039, dated March 8, 2022 

(EASA AD 2022–0039). 

(1) Model A330–201, –202, –203, –223, 

–223F, –243, –243F, –301, –302, –303, –321, 

–322, –323, –341, –342, –343, and –941 

airplanes. 

(2) Model A340–211, –212, –213, –311, 

–312, and –313 airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 27, Flight Controls. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by recent tests that 

demonstrated that when the upper secondary 

load path (SLP) of the trimmable horizontal 

stabilizer actuator (THSA) is engaged, the 

THSA might not stall, with consequently no 

indication of SLP engagement. The FAA is 

issuing this AD to prevent damage on the 

upper THSA SLP attachment, with 

consequent mechanical disconnection of the 

THSA, possibly resulting in loss of control of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Requirements 

Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Comply with all required actions and 

compliance times specified in, and in 

accordance with, EASA AD 2022–0039. 

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022–0039 

(1) Where EASA AD 2022–0039 refers to its 

effective date, this AD requires using the 

effective date of this AD. 

(2) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD 

2022–0039 does not apply to this AD. 

(i) Additional AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Large Aircraft 

Section, International Validation 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 Large Aircraft 

Section, International Validation Branch, 

send it to the attention of the person 

identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-AVS-AIR730-AMOC@faa.gov. Before using any 

approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 

principal inspector, or lacking a principal 

inspector, the manager of the responsible 

Flight Standards Office. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain instructions 

from a manufacturer, the instructions must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, Large Aircraft Section, 

International Validation Branch, FAA; or 

EASA; or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by 

the DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 

(3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except 

as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if 

any service information contains procedures 

or tests that are identified as RC, those 

procedures and tests must be done to comply 

with this AD; any procedures or tests that are 

not identified as RC are recommended. Those 

procedures and tests that are not identified 

as RC may be deviated from using accepted 

methods in accordance with the operator’s 

maintenance or inspection program without 

obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided 

the procedures and tests identified as RC can 

be done and the airplane can be put back in 

an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or 

changes to procedures or tests identified as 

RC require approval of an AMOC. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For EASA AD 2022–0039, contact 

EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 

Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 

000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; internet 

www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this 

EASA AD on the EASA website at https://

ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this 

material 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. This 

material may be found in the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2022–0522. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace 

Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, 

International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 

South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; 

telephone and fax 206–231–3229; email 

Vladimir.Ulyanov@faa.gov. 

Issued on May 13, 2022. 

Gaetano A. Sciortino, 

Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, 

Compliance & Airworthiness Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10722 Filed 5–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket No. CPSC–2022–0015] 

Petitions Requesting Rulemaking To 

Amend the Safety Standard for Play 

Yards To Require a Minimum 

Thickness for Play Yard Mattresses, 

and To Standardize the Size of Play 

Yards and Play Yard Mattresses; 

Request for Comments 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of petitions for 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission (Commission or 

CPSC) received two petitions regarding 

play yards and play yard mattresses. 

The Commission invites written 

comments concerning these petitions. 

DATES: Submit comments by July 18, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2022– 

0015, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit 

electronic comments to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

CPSC typically does not accept 

comments submitted by electronic mail 

(email), except through https://

www.regulations.gov. CPSC encourages 

you to submit electronic comments by 

using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, 

as described above. 

Mail/hand delivery/courier Written 

Submissions: Submit comments by 

mail/hand delivery/courier to: Division 

of the Secretariat, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone: (301) 504–7479. 

Alternatively, as a temporary option 

during the COVID–19 pandemic, you 

can email such submissions to: cpsc-os@

cpsc.gov. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules 30437 

1On May 3, 2022, the Commission voted 3–1 to 

publish this Notice of Petitions for Rulemaking in 

the Federal Register. 

number for this notice. CPSC may post 

all comments without change, including 

any personal identifiers, contact 

information, or other personal 

information provided, to: https://

www.regulations.gov. Do not submit 

electronically: Confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

that you do not want to be available to 

the public. If you wish to submit such 

information, please submit it according 

to the instructions for mail/hand 

delivery/courier written submissions. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: https://

www.regulations.gov, and insert the 

docket number, CPSC–2022–0015, into 

the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the 

prompts. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alberta E. Mills, Division of the 

Secretariat, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone: 301– 

504–7479 (office) and 240–863–8938 

(work cell); cpsc-os@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 29, 2021, Carol PollackNelson, Ph.D. of Independent Safety 

Consulting, LLC, Sarah B. Newens, M.S. 

of Safety and Systems Solutions, M.S., 

and Alan H. Schoem, Esq. (collectively 

‘‘Petitioners’’) submitted two documents 

to the Commission through the Division 

of the Secretariat, titled: (1) Petition to 

Require Minimum Thickness for Play 

Yard Mattresses (‘‘Mattress Thickness 

Petition’’), and (2) Petition to 

Standardize the Size of Play Yards and 

Play Yard Mattresses (‘‘Play Yard Size 

Petition’’) (collectively ‘‘petitions’’).1

The petitions seek a rulemaking to 

amend the Commission’s regulation, 

Safety Standard for Play Yards, 16 CFR 

part 1221, to address the hazard of 

infants becoming entrapped between the 

edge of a play yard and the play yard 

mattress and suffocating (‘‘gap 

entrapment hazard’’). CSPC docketed 

the Mattress Thickness Petition as 

petition CP 22–1 and docketed the Play 

Yard Size Petition as CP 22–2. 

The Mattress Thickness Petition states 

that to reduce consumer perception that 

a play yard floor is too hard, and the 

notion that soft bedding should be 

added for the comfort of an infant, the 

Commission should require a minimum 

play yard mattress thickness of 1.5 

inches with a minimal tolerance 

allowed. Additionally, Petitioners seek a 

maximum 0.5-inch gap requirement 

between a play yard mattress and the 

mesh side of the play yard wall, and to 

allow a maximum play yard mattress 

thickness of 3 inches. 

The Play Yard Size Petition seeks to 

‘‘mitigate the risk posed by an 

undersized mattress in a play yard’’ by 

standardizing the size of play yards and 

play yard mattresses ‘‘to one size for 

each given perimeter shape,’’ meaning 

‘‘one size for square play yards, one size 

for rectangular play yards, one size for 

oval play yards and one size for round 

play yards.’’ Petitioners assert that this 

change also would reduce hazardous 

gaps between play yard mattresses and 

play yard walls. 

By this notice, the Commission seeks 

comments concerning the two petitions. 

In particular, the Commission seeks 

comments on the following: 

• The Commission considered the 

gap-entrapment hazard in granting 

petition CP 15–2, Petition Requesting 

Rulemaking on Supplemental 

Mattresses for Play Yards with NonRigid Sides, in establishing a Safety 

Standard for Crib Mattresses, and in 

continuing to work on play yard 

mattress requirements with the ASTM 

F15.18 Subcommittee on Play Yards and 

Non-Full-Size Cribs. What effect would 

these new petitions have on the 

Commission’s work on this issue? 

• Are any of the issues raised in the 

Mattress Thickness Petition supported, 

mooted, or rendered superfluous by the 

continuing work on the gap-entrapment 

hazard in the ASTM F15.18 

Subcommittee on Play Yards and NonFull-Size Cribs? 

• The Commission, by statute, will 

consider any revised ASTM voluntary 

standard for play yards if ASTM notifies 

the Commission of a revised standard. 

15 U.S.C. 2056a(b)(4). Based on the new 

petitions, should the Commission 

commit additional resources to the gapentrapment issue, beyond staff’s current 

work on mattress fit and thickness with 

the ASTM F15.18 Subcommittee on 

Play Yards and Non-Full-Size Cribs? 

Why or why not? 

• The Commission’s rules are 

typically stated in terms of performance 

requirements, and/or requirements for 

labeling and instructions. See, e.g., 15 

U.S.C. 2056(a). Is the proposal in the 

Play Yard Size Petition to limit the sizes 

of play yards and play yard mattresses 

consistent with this practice? If not, is 

the departure justified? 

• Can the safety objective identified 

in the Play Yard Size Petition, i.e., 

assisting consumers to purchase play 

yard mattresses that properly fit into a 

play yard, be addressed by a 

performance requirement different from 

that proposed in the Play Yard Size 

Petition? If so, are there reasons to favor 

or disfavor the requirement proposed in 

the Play Yard Size Petition? Does the 

existing requirement for play yard 

mattresses in the Safety Standard for 

Play Yards adequately address this 

hazard? 

The petitions are available at: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, under Docket No. 

CPSC–2022–0015, Supporting and 

Related Materials. Alternatively, 

interested parties may obtain a copy of 

the petitions by writing or calling the 

Division of the Secretariat, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 4330 EastWest Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone: 301–504–7479 or 240–863– 

8938; cpsc-os@cpsc.gov. 

Brenda Rouse, 

Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10293 Filed 5–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0419; FRL–9830–01– 

R7] 

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; St. Louis 

Area Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve, 

through parallel processing, revisions to 

the Missouri State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) relating to the St. Louis area’s 

vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/ 

M) Program received on November 12, 

2019, and March 2, 2022. In the 

submissions, Missouri requests EPA 

approval of revisions to a regulation and 

related plan that implement the St. 

Louis area’s Inspection and 

Maintenance program called, Gateway 

Vehicle Inspection Program (GVIP). We 

propose to approve Missouri’s removal 

of vehicles registered in Franklin 

County, unless the vehicle is primarily 

operated in the rest of the area, from the 

Gateway Vehicle Inspection program. 

The revisions to this rule include 

amending the rule exemption section for 

vehicles subject to the rule, removing 

unnecessary words, amending 

definitions specific to the rule, updates 

due to technology changes, and other 

minor edits. These revisions do not 

impact the attainment of any National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

nor delay the timely attainment of 2015 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1