        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [DA 04-375, MB Docket No. 04-31, RM-10852]
        Television Broadcast Service; Gainesville, FL

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          The Commission requests comments on a petition filed by Gainesville Channel 61 Associates, LLC proposing the substitution of channel 29 for channel 61+ at Gainesville, Florida. TV Channel 29 can be allotted to Gainesville with a zero offset at reference coordinates 29-37-47 N. and 82-34-24 W.

          DATES:
          Comments must be filed on or before April 12, 2004, and reply comments on or before April 27, 2004.

          ADDRESSES:

          The Commission permits the electronic filing of all pleadings and comments in proceeding involving petitions for rule making (except in broadcast allotment proceedings). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rule Making Proceedings, GC Docket No. 97-113 (rel. April 6, 1998). Filings by paper can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, as follows: David D. Oxenford, Shaw Pittman, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037-1128 (Counsel for Gainesville Channel 61 Associates, LLC).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Pam Blumenthal, Media Bureau, (202) 418-1600.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 04-31, adopted February 12, 2004, and released February 20, 2004. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC, 20554, telephone 202-863-2893, facsimile 202-863-2898, or via-e-mail qualexint@aol.com.

        Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding.

        Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts.
        For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

          List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
          Television broadcasting.

        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows:

          PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
          1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

            § 73.606
            [Amended]
            2. Section 73.606(b), the Table of Television Allotments under Florida, is amended by removing channel 61+ and adding channel 29 at Gainesville.

            Federal Communications Commission.
            Barbara A. Kreisman,
            Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 04-4620 Filed 3-1-04; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 001120324-0324-01; I.D. 110700D]
        RIN  0648-AO71
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; Extension of Closed Areas

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
           This proposed rule would extend the closure of the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach Sea Scallop Closed Areas for 180 days or until such time that a controlled area access program for these two areas can be implemented through Framework 14 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan (FMP), whichever is sooner.  This action, which is necessary to reduce overfishing, would help ensure that fishing mortality rates do not exceed the target thresholds established in the FMP.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern daylight time, January 2, 2001.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on this proposed rule should be sent to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, Northeast Regional Office, NMFS,1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA  01930-2298.  Please mark the envelope “Comments - Extension of Mid-Atlantic Scallop Closed Areas.”  Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 978-281-9135.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or Internet.  Comments regarding any ambiguity or unnecessary complexity arising from the language used in this rule should also be sent to Patricia Kurkul.  Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) and any other documents supporting this action are available from the Regional Office at the address specified here.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Peter W. Christopher, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9288, fax 978-281-9135, e-mail peter.christopher@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The 23rd Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW 23), in March 1997, identified high fishing mortality rates, low stock size, and lack of significant recruitment in the Atlantic sea scallop (scallop) fishery.  Based on this finding, scientists involved with SAW 23 determined that fishing effort should be reduced immediately and significantly in the Mid-Atlantic region to preserve spawning stock biomass and improve the yield per recruit.  To achieve this, NMFS implemented an interim final rule on April 3, 1998 (63 FR 15324), that established two areas in the Mid-Atlantic region that were closed to all scallop fishing.  The closure of these two areas, the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach Closed Areas, was based on a finding that the areas contained large concentrations of small and juvenile scallops that could provide for future recruitment.  The interim final rule was subsequently extended for 180 days (63 FR 51862, September 29, 1998) and on March 29, 1999, Amendment 7 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan (FMP) (64 FR 14835) extended the effective date of the closures through March 1, 2001. -
        While there are still concentrations of small scallops in the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach Closed Areas, recent surveys by the NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Virginia Institute of Marine Science indicate that a large portion of the protected scallops have grown and could be of considerable value to the fishing industry.  Because of the vulnerability of these scallops to fishing upon the re-opening of the closed areas on March 1, 2001, concern was expressed by scientists in the recent Sea Scallop Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation report that a high amount of fishing effort in these areas would increase fishing mortality rates beyond management thresholds, would contribute to overfishing, and would compromise future recruitment of scallops.  To address this concern, the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is currently developing Framework 14 to the FMP, the annual framework adjustment, with the intention of including an area access program for the Mid-Atlantic closed areas.  This program would restrict scallop vessels when fishing in the re-opened Mid-Atlantic closed areas to a scallop possession limit and a limited amount of trips, among other measures.  Because the Council is preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Framework 14 to assess the impacts of the fishery on the human environment, it is highly unlikely that the framework can be implemented by March 1, 2001, the date that the Mid-Atlantic closed areas are scheduled to re-open.  An extension of the closures is therefore necessary to ensure that the areas do not open prior to protective measures being in place.  Without such action, overfishing would likely occur before Framework 14 can be implemented, and the ability to maximize scallop yields from the areas and ensure that recruitment potential is maintained could be compromised.  If that were to occur, long-term benefits to the scallop fishery could be significantly reduced. -
        Proposed Action
        The proposed rule would delay the re-opening of the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach scallop closed areas for 180 days or until such time that new measures to prevent overfishing in the areas are implemented, whichever is sooner.  This action is authorized by section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and may be extended for an additional 180-day period.  -
        Classification
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. -

        NMFS prepared an IRFA as part of an RIR that describes the economic impact this action, if adopted, would have on small entities.  A copy of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).  A summary of the analysis follows: -

        The IRFA describes this action, sets forth why it is being taken, and the legal basis for it.  A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action appear in the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section and is not repeated here.   -
        The IRFA considered the impacts that this action will have on small entities, which includes all holders of active scallop permits, since none have reported gross annual revenues greater than $3 million.  The 1999 fishing season, March 1, 1999, to February 28, 2000, was the last full year of scallop fishing activity available for analysis.  During that season, there were 345 qualified permits in the Limited Access fishery.  Two-hundred and ninety of these permits were on vessels that landed scallops.  The remaining 55 Limited Access permits were in Confirmation of Permit History, a category of permit for vessels that were destroyed or that were sold and the permit eligibility retained by the seller.  In addition, 2,095 permits were issued to vessels in the open access General Category, but only 190 of these vessels could be identified in the dealer reports as having landed scallops.  The proposed action to extend the closures of the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach Closed Areas for 180 days from March 1, 2001, or until Framework 14 can be implemented (currently estimated to be May 2001), whichever is sooner, should have a positive net impact on small business entities during the next few years and is not expected to impact segments of the fishery differentially.  Without this proposed action, the most likely outcome would be that Framework 14 would have to prevent further access to these closed areas during 2001 because the vessels would have exceeded the target fishing mortalities and total allowable catch by the time Framework 14 becomes effective.  One alternative considered by NMFS but rejected would have allowed the Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach Closed Areas to re-open, as scheduled, on March 1, 2001.  Under this alternative, overfishing would likely occur in the areas, and the ability to maximize scallop yields from the areas and ensure that recruitment potential is maintained could be compromised, thereby reducing long-term benefits to the scallop fishing industry.  Depending on the amount of fishing that has occurred in the absence of this interim action, access during the 2002 season might also have to be reduced substantially in order to rebuild the stock.   -
        The proposed action is not expected to reduce overall access to the closed areas in 2001 and will protect the growth potential of more young scallops for 2002, provided that Framework 14 is implemented in a timely fashion, as anticipated by the Council.  The Scallop Plan Development Team (PDT), in preparing analyses for Framework 14, has estimated that each limited access permit holder will be allocated between three and five trips into the Mid-Atlantic areas, depending on their effort category and the fishing mortality scenario selected by the Council.  Although 10 days at sea would be charged to each trip, the scallop resource density in the areas to be re-opened is high enough that trip limits that meet fishing mortality targets may be able to be taken in 3 to 5 days, as estimated by the PDT.  Thus, there may still be time in the 2001 season for vessels to fish in the re-opened areas and to take their allotted limits.  Moreover, vessels would be free to use their effort allocation outside the closed areas until Framework 14 goes into effect.  Thus, any short-term negative impacts caused by delaying the re-opening of the two Mid-Atlantic areas to scallop fishing are expected to be offset by access to those areas in the remainder of 2001 and by future recruitment of scallops. -
        This proposed rule has no projected reporting,  recordkeeping, or compliance requirements.  Also, there are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. -

        The President has directed Federal agencies to use plain language in their communications with the public, including regulations.  To comply with this directive, we seek public comment on any ambiguity or unnecessary complexity arising from the language used in this proposed rule.  Such comments should be sent to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator (see ADDRESSES).

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
          Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: November 27, 2000.
          Penelope D. Dalton,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

          For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed to be amended as follows:

            PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

          1.  The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

          2.  In § 648.57, the first sentence of paragraph (a) and (b) are revised to read as follows:

            § 648.57
            Closed areas.
            (a) * * * No vessel may fish for, possess, or retain sea scallops in or from the area known as the Hudson Canyon South Closed Area or transit this closed area unless all scallop dredge gear on board is properly stowed and not available for immediate use in accordance with the provisions of § 648.23(b). * * *
            (b) * * *  No vessel may fish for, possess, or retain sea scallops in or from the area known as the Virginia Beach Closed Area or transit this closed area unless all scallop dredge gear on board is properly stowed and not available for immediate use in accordance with the provisions of § 648.23(b). * * *

      [FR Doc. 00-30678 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE:  3510-22 -S


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        48 CFR Part 252
        [DFARS Case 2002-D013]
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Indian Incentive Clause—Contract Types

          AGENCY:
          Department of Defense (DoD).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule with request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to clarify that the clause permitting incentive payments for use of Indian organizations as subcontractors may be used in all contract types.

          DATES:
          DoD will consider all comments received by January 21, 2003.

          ADDRESSES:

          Respondents may submit comments directly on the World Wide Web at http://emissary.acq.osd.mil/dar/dfars.nsf/pubcomm. As an alternative, respondents may e-mail comments to: dfars@acq.osd.mil. Please cite DFARS Case 2002-D013 in the subject line of e-mailed comments.
          Respondents that cannot submit comments using either of the above methods may submit comments to: Defense Acquisition Regulations Council, Attn: Ms. Angelena Moy, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DAR), IMD 3C132, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062; facsimile (703) 602-0350. Please cite DFARS Case 2002-D013.

          At the end of the comment period, interested parties may view public comments on the World Wide Web at http://emissary.acq.osd.mil/dar/dfars.nsf.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Ms. Angelena Moy, (703) 602-1302.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        A. Background
        The clause at DFARS 252.226-7001, Utilization of Indian Organizations and Indian-Owned Economic Enterprises—DoD Contracts, provides for incentive payments to contractors, and subcontractors at any tier, that use Indian organizations and Indian-owned economic enterprises as subcontractors. Paragraph (e) of the clause presently addresses incentive payments under cost-type, cost-plus-incentive-fee, fixed-price incentive, and firm-fixed-price contracts. Application of the Indian Incentive Program is not limited to these contract types; therefore, this proposed rule eliminates the references to contract types to avoid any misconceptions regarding contract types that are not listed.
        This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

        DoD does not expect this rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the rule is a clarification of existing policy regarding the Indian Incentive Program. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subpart in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2002-D013.
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act

        The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the rule does not impose any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 252
          Government procurement.

          Michele P. Peterson,
          Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations Council.

        Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 CFR Part 252 as follows:
        1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Part 252 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1.

          PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
          2. Section 252.226-7001 is amended by revising the clause date and paragraph (e) to read as follows:

            252.226-7001
            Utilization of Indian Organizations and Indian-Owned Economic Enterprises—DoD Contracts.

              Utilization of Indian Organizations and Indian-Owned Economic Enterprises—DOD Contracts (XXX 2002)

              (e)(1) The Contractor, on its own behalf or on behalf of a subcontractor at any tier, may request an adjustment under the Indian Incentive Program.
              (2) The amount of the adjustment that may be requested is 5 percent of the estimated cost, target cost, or fixed price included in the subcontract at the time of award to the Indian organization or Indian-owned economic enterprise.
              (3) The Contractor has the burden of proving the amount claimed and must assert its request for an adjustment prior to completion of contract performance.
              (4) The Contracting Officer, subject to the terms and conditions of the contract and the availability of funds, will authorize an incentive payment of 5 percent of the estimated cost, target cost, or fixed price included in the subcontract awarded to the Indian organization or Indian-owned economic enterprise.

      [FR Doc. 02-29465 Filed 11-21-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 5001-08-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Aviation Administration
        14 CFR Part 39
        [Docket No. FAA-2020-0238; Product Identifier 2018-SW-072-AD]
        RIN 2120-AA64
        Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

          AGENCY:
          Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

          SUMMARY:

          The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Helicopters Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that a changed manufacturing process for the tail rotor blades (TRB) was implemented, affecting the structural characteristics of the blades and generating a new part number for these blades. This proposed AD would require re-identifying each affected TRB having a certain part number and serial number and establishing a life limit for the new part numbers. This AD also prohibits installation of any affected TRB identified with the old part number on any helicopter. 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 April 27, 2020.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Fax: 202-493-2251.
          • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
          • Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone 972-641-0000 or 800-232-0323; fax 972-641-3775; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 817-222 5110.

        Examining the AD Docket
        You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0238; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Kristi Bradley, Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone 817-222-5485; email Kristin.Bradley@faa.gov.

        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 the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2020-0238; Product Identifier 2018-SW-072-AD” at the beginning of your comments. The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because of those comments.

        The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.
        Discussion
        The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (previously European Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0182, dated August 28, 2018 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Helicopters EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters. EASA advises that a changed manufacturing process for TRBs was implemented, affecting the structural characteristic of the TRBs and generating a new part number for these blades. Because this is a newly established part number, no service life limit currently exists for this part. This EASA AD identifies a service life limit for the newly established TRB part numbers, which, if not required, might result in TRBs exceeding their life limit. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to loss of the TRB and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. The EASA AD also prohibits installation of any affected TRB identified with the old part number on any helicopter, and prohibits rework, repair, or modification of any affected part.

        You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0238.
        Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
        Airbus Helicopters has issued Alert Service Bulletin EC130-04A007, dated July 18, 2018 (“ASB EC130-04A007”). This service information describes procedures for re-identifying a TRB with P/N 350A333002.02 for certain serial numbers, as specified in ASB EC130-04A007.

        This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.
        FAA's Determination
        This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
        Proposed Requirements of This NPRM
        This proposed AD would require re-identifying each affected TRB with a new part number, establishing a life limit for the new TRB part number, and would prohibit installation of any affected TRB identified with the old part number on any helicopter.
        Difference Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information
        EASA AD 2018-0182 specifies to replace TRBs having P/N 350A333002.05. However, this part number is not installed on in-service helicopters and is not addressed in Airbus Helicopters ASB EC130-04A007. Therefore, this AD does not require replacing TRBs having P/N 350A333002.05.
        Costs of Compliance

        The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 253 helicopters of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

          Estimated Costs for Required Actions *

            Labor cost
            Parts cost
            Cost perproduct

            Cost on U.S. operators

            1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85
            ** $0
            $85
            * $21,505

          * The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the additional applicable maintenance instructions specified in this proposed AD.
          ** The FAA has received no definitive data on the parts costs for required actions.

        Authority for This Rulemaking
        Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
        The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
        Regulatory Findings
        The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
        For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
        (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
        (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

          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 (AD):

            Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2020-0238; Product Identifier 2018-SW-072-AD.
          (a) Comments Due Date
          The FAA must receive comments by April 27, 2020.
          (b) Affected ADs
          None.
          (c) Applicability
          This AD applies to all Airbus Helicopters Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters, certificated in any category.
          (d) Subject
          Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code 6410, Tail rotor blade.
          (e) Reason
          This AD was prompted by a report that a new manufacturing process for the tail rotor blades (TRBs) has been implemented, affecting the structural characteristics of the TRB and generating a new part number (P/N) for these blades. It was determined that a new life limit is needed for the new P/N TRBs. The FAA is issuing this AD to ensure the new P/N TRBs do not exceed their life limit, which could lead to loss of the TRB and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
          (f) Compliance
          Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
          (g) Definition of an Affected Part for the Re-Identification and Validation of Rework/Repair/Modification
          An “affected part” is a TRB having P/N 350A333002.02 and a serial number specified in Appendix 4.A. of Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin EC130-04A007, dated July 18, 2018 (“ASB EC130-04A007”).
          (h) Part Replacement (Life Limit Implementation)
          Before exceeding 10,000 hours time-in-service (TIS) since first installation on a helicopter: Remove from service each TRB having P/N 350A333002.04.
          (i) Part Re-Identification and Validation of Rework/Repair/Modification
          (1) Within 1,200 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD: Re-identify each affected part, in accordance with 3.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Helicopters ASB EC130-04A007.
          (2) For each affected part which has been subject to rework, repair, or modification before the re-identification, as required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, contact the Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, for additional applicable maintenance instructions and, within the compliance time identified in those instructions, accomplish those instructions accordingly.
          (j) Parts Installation Prohibition and Rework/Repair/Modification Limitation
          (1) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a TRB having P/N 350A333002.02 and a serial number specified in Appendix 4.A. of ASB EC130-04A007 on any helicopter.
          (2) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may accomplish any rework, repair, or modification of an affected part, unless it has been determined that the rework, repair, or modification is FAA-approved for P/N 350A333002.04.
          (k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

          (1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Kristi Bradley, Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone 817-222-5485; email 9-ASW-FTW-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
          (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, notify your principal inspector or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.
          (l) Related Information

          (1) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (previously European Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD 2018-0182, dated August 28, 2018. This EASA AD may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0238.

          (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone 972-641-0000 or 800-232-0323; fax 972-641-3775; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 817-222-5110.

          Issued on March 4, 2020.
          Gaetano A. Sciortino,
          Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.

      [FR Doc. 2020-04973 Filed 3-10-20; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        Defense Acquisition Regulations System
        48 CFR Parts 215, 242, and 252
        RIN 0750-AI20
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Business Systems Compliance (DFARS Case 2012-D042)

          AGENCY:
          Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; correction.

          SUMMARY:

          This document corrects the preamble to a proposed rule published in the Federal Register on July 15, 2014, regarding Business Systems Compliance. This correction revises the time scheduled for the public meeting to be held on August 18, 2014. There are no other changes.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Mr. Mark Gomersall, telephone 571-372-6099.
          Correction

          In the proposed rule published at 79 FR 41172, dated July 15, 2014, make the following correction to the Public Meeting Date section.

            Public Meeting Date: The public meeting will be held at the Mark Center Auditorium, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-3603, on August 18, 2014, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., local time.

            Amy G. Williams,
            Deputy, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

      [FR Doc. 2014-17216 Filed 7-21-14; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 5001-06-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
        49 CFR Chapter V
        [Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0090], Notice 2
        Federal Automated Vehicles Policy

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public meeting.

          SUMMARY:
          NHTSA is announcing a public meeting to seek input on the recently released Federal Automated Vehicles Policy (the Policy). The Policy is guidance that seeks to speed the delivery of an initial regulatory framework for highly automated vehicles (HAVs) as well as encourage conformance with best practices to guide manufacturers and other entities in the safe design, development, testing, and deployment of HAVs.
          The public meeting will be an open listening session to provide as great an opportunity for comment as possible. All comments will be oral and any presentations should be submitted to the docket for inclusion. Additionally, all interested parties, either not in attendance or who are unable to speak, are invited to share any views or information they would like considered through the docket as well.

          DATES:
          NHTSA will hold the public meeting on November 10, 2016, in Washington, DC. The meeting will start at 9 a.m. and continue until 4 p.m. local time. Check-in (through security) will begin at 8 a.m. Attendees should arrive early enough to enable them to go through security by 9 a.m.

          ADDRESSES:
          The meeting will be held at the United States General Services Administration, Regional Office Building located at 301 7th Street (7th & D Streets) SW., Washington, DC 20407. This facility is accessible to individuals with disabilities.

            Written Comments: Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as oral comments presented at the public meeting. Please submit all written comments no later than November 22, 2016, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. To submit comments on the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy, please use docket NHTSA-2016-0090.
          NHTSA issued a separate notice and created a separate docket for the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection request related to the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy (81 FR 65709). In that notice, NHTSA estimated the potential burden associated with submitting information to NHTSA as recommended by the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy. To submit comments on the information collection request related to the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy, please use docket NHTSA-2016-0091.
          • Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
          • Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
          • Fax: 202-366-1767.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and associated docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below.

            Docket: For access to the docket go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. Telephone: 202-366-9826.

            Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78), you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

            Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim to be confidential business information to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the address given above. When you send a comment containing information claimed to be confidential business information, you should submit a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential business information regulation (49 CFR part 512).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          If you have questions about the public meeting, please contact Ms. Yvonne Clarke, Program Assistant, Office of Vehicle Safety Research at (202) 366-1845 or by email at av_info_nhtsa@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background

        On September 20, 2016, DOT released the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy. The Policy is intended to ensure automated vehicle technologies are safely introduced and achieve their full safety potential by removing potential roadblocks to the integration of innovative automotive technology. The full Policy can be found at www.nhtsa.gov/AV.
        On September 23, 2016, DOT published a notice requesting written public comment regarding the contents of the Policy.1
           Those comments are due November 22, 2016. Concurrent with the notice requesting public comment, DOT published a separate notice opening a separate docket for commenters to respond to the proposed information collection request for the Policy (81 FR 65709).

            1 81 FR 65703 (September 23, 2016), NHTSA-2016-0090.

        Meeting
        NHTSA has laid out four sections within the Policy that focus on priority areas related to HAVs. During the morning session of the meeting, the Agency will seek public input on those four sections to include: Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles, Model State Policy, NHTSA's Current Regulatory Tools, and Modern Regulatory Tools. The focus will be to gather feedback regarding how manufacturers and other entities have understood these four areas of interest, if there are challenges foreseen, suggestions for clarification or more thorough explanation, recommended improvements, or other input.
        During the afternoon session of the meeting, the Agency will seek specific input from the public on the safety assessment letter. The intent of the policy is for manufacturers and other entities involved in the design, development, validation, testing and deployment of automated vehicles to voluntarily submit to the Agency a letter describing how they are meeting the 15 safety areas in the vehicle performance guidance outlined in the policy.
        NHTSA is seeking input to refine the overall structure and content of the safety assessment letter from the parties responsible for the preparation and submission of these letters. This input will aid the Agency in developing a template for entities to use as well as further refine our anticipated internal processes necessary to review submissions in a timely fashion.
        The meeting announced by this notice is being held during the open comment period for the Policy to provide an opportunity for individuals to provide oral feedback regarding the four sections of the Policy.

        Registration is necessary for all attendees. Attendees, including those who do not plan to make any oral remarks at the meeting, should register at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12_tCd_PEWBiPCLnp1KmsSXV9vsoV6iAm1o_n736lbds/viewform?edit_requested=true by November 8, 2016. Please provide your name, email address, and affiliation, indicate if you wish to offer oral technical remarks, and please indicate whether you require accommodations such as a sign language interpreter. Space is limited, so advanced registration is highly encouraged.
        Although attendees will be given the opportunity to offer technical remarks, there will not be time for attendees to make audio-visual presentations during the meeting. Additionally, NHTSA may not be able to accommodate all attendees who wish to make oral remarks. All interested parties, not in attendance, unable to comment verbally, or otherwise, are invited to share any views or information they would like considered in the docket.
        NHTSA will conduct the public meeting informally, and technical rules of evidence will not apply. We will arrange for a written transcript of the meeting. You may make arrangements for copies of the transcripts directly with the court reporter. The transcript will also be posted in the docket when it becomes available.
        Should it be necessary to cancel the meeting due to inclement weather or other emergency, NHTSA will take all available measures to notify registered participants.
        Draft Meeting Agenda
        8:00-9:00—Arrival/Check-In
        9:00-12:00—Public Meeting Session on the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy Document
        12:00—Lunch (on your own)/Arrival/Check-In
        13:00-15:30—Invited Technical Comments/Other Oral Remarks on Safety Assessment Letter
        15:30-16:00—Open Microphone
        16:00—Adjourn
        Morning Session Meeting Topics
        The morning session of the meeting will provide an opportunity for individuals to express feedback regarding the four sections of the Policy. NHTSA has issued the Policy to ensure automated vehicle technologies are safely introduced and achieve their full safety potential by removing potential roadblocks to the integration of innovative automotive technology.
        • Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles: This section, which is addressed to manufacturers, developers, and other organizations, outlines a 15 point “Safety Assessment” for the safe design, development, validation, testing, and deployment of automated vehicles.
        • Model State Policy: This section describes the separate and distinct responsibilities of the Federal and State governments for regulation of HAVs, and recommends policy areas for States to consider with a goal of generating a consistent national framework for the validation, testing, and deployment of highly automated vehicles.
        • Current Regulatory Tools: This section outlines DOT's current regulatory tools that can be used in a more timely and effective fashion to accelerate the safe development of HAVs, such as interpreting current rules to allow for greater flexibility in design and providing limited exemptions to allow manufacturers to gain experience with nontraditional vehicle designs.
        • Modern Regulatory Tools: This section identifies potential new regulatory tools and statutory authorities that may aid the safe and efficient deployment of new lifesaving technologies.
        Afternoon Session Meeting Topics
        The afternoon session of the meeting provides an opportunity for individuals to specifically comment on the Safety Assessment Letter to NHTSA.2
           As an example, the Agency is interested in how to structure a letter such that it contains enough information to enable the public and the Agency to understand how the submitter of the letter is meeting the 15 safety areas, but avoids revealing confidential business information or inadvertently creating a competitive disadvantage to anyone submitting the letter. Concurrent with the Policy, DOT also opened a docket for commenters to respond to this proposed information collection request for the Policy (81 FR 65709).

            2 Ibid., 15.

        Specifically, commenters are asked to discuss the following topics at the meeting:
        • Content and Structure

        The Agency seeks comment on how much and what types of information should be included in the letter to enable the public and the Agency to understand the submitter's process, plan, approach, or other areas. In the interest of achieving a reasonable degree of consistency in the letters it receives, the Agency also seeks comments on how the letters should be formatted. Finally, what is the expected length of a well formatted letter?
        • Identification of Responsible Manufacturers and Other Entities
        The Agency seeks comment on the entities that should be responsible for the submission of these letters. Commenters should also consider who should submit in these letters in the event that multiple parties collaborate together.
        • Transparency
        The Agency seeks to be as transparent as possible with these letters, and expects to make them public to increase public understanding and build consumer confidence. If commenters believe that certain portions of the letter should not be made available to the general public, please identify those portions and explain the reasons for that belief and how withholding those portions might affect public understanding and confidence. Commenters should discuss what format the agency should use to present the public display of the information.
        • Agency Response Processes
        The Agency will respond to persons who comment on safety assessment letters received by the Agency. Commenters should focus on what form this response should take, as well as what information the agency should include. Commenters should also discuss their views on making these responses available to the public.
        • Timing
        The Agency seeks comments on the timing proposed in the Policy document for the submission of the letters. Commenters should discuss what types of changes or updates are important enough to trigger the need to submit a new letter. In the event that changes or updates to automated features make it necessary to submit a new letter, commenters should discuss what time frame would be appropriate for re-submittal of the assessment letters.

          Nathaniel Beuse,
          Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety Research.

      [FR Doc. 2016-26561 Filed 11-4-16; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 4910-59-P