[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 20, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48790-48794]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23208]
[[Page 48789]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Aviation Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
14 CFR Part 21
Type Certification Procedures for Changes in Helicopter Type Design;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 1995 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 48790]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. 22334; Notice No. 95-15]
RIN 2120-AF10
Proposed Amendment of the Type Certification Procedures for
Changes in Helicopter Type Design To Attach or Remove External
Equipment
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the existing helicopter noise
certification procedures with respect to certain changes in type
designs. This proposal would amend the applicability of the noise
certification procedures to exclude those changes in type design that
involve the attachment or removal of external equipment, floats and
skis, and certain airframe and operational changes made to accommodate
such changes in type design (acoustical change requirements). This
proposal would also exclude helicopter flight operations with doors
and/or windows removed or in an open position from the applicability of
the acoustical change requirements. This change would reconcile 14 CFR
part 21 with the procedural treatment of external equipment in the
original helicopter noise certification rulemaking effort and would
make U.S. helicopter noise certification regulations more consistent
with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 20, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to: Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attn.: Rules Docket (AGC-
10), Docket No. 28334, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 915G,
Washington, DC 20591 or deliver comments in triplicate to: FAA Rules
Docket, Room 915G, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20591.
Comments may also be submitted electronically to the following Internet
address: nprmcmts@mail.hq.faa.gov. Comments may be inspected in Room
915G between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m., weekdays, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Kenneth E. Jones, Research and Engineering Branch (AEE-110),
Technology Division, Office of Environment and Energy, FAA, 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone (202) 267-
8933, facsimile (202) 267-5594.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or arguments and by commenting on the
possible environmental, energy, or economic impacts of this proposal.
Comments should identify the regulatory docket or notice number and be
submitted in triplicate to the address above. All comments received, as
well as a report summarizing any substantive public contact with
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) personnel on this rulemaking will
be filed in the docket, and will be considered by the Administrator
before taking action on this proposed rulemaking. The docket is
available for public inspection both before and after the closing date
for comments. The FAA will acknowledge the receipt of a comment if the
commenter includes a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. 28334''. When the
comment is received by the FAA, the postcard will be dated, time
stamped, and returned to the commenter.
Availability of the NPRM
Any person may obtain a copy of this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration,
Office of Public Affairs, Attention: Public Information Center, APA-
230, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling
(202) 267-3474. Requests should be identified by the docket number of
this proposed rule.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
notices of proposed rulemaking should also request a copy of Advisory
Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System,
which describes the application procedure.
Background
Statement of the Problem
The certification procedures for aeronautical products and parts
are contained in 14 CFR part 21. Under part 21, an applicant for
approval of a change to a helicopter type certificate must show
compliance with the noise regulations in 14 CFR part 36 (part 36) if
the change in type design may increase the noise level of the
helicopter (an acoustical change). Section 21.93 defines an
``acoustical change'' and classifies the aircraft which must
demonstrate compliance with part 36 following an acoustical change.
Section 21.93(b)(4) described helicopters required to demonstrate
compliance with part 36 for an acoustical change, and specifically
excludes helicopters designated exclusively for ``agricultural aircraft
operations,'' ``dispensing firefighting materials,'' or ``carrying
external loads.'' The intent of the existing Sec. 21.93(b)(4) is to
exclude helicopters designated exclusively to carry external loads from
the requirement to demonstrate compliance with part 36.
This proposal addresses type certification (including noise
requirements) procedures for changes to helicopter type designs to
configure helicopters for carriage of external equipment. External
equipment is defined herein as any instrument, mechanism, part,
apparatus, or accessory that is attached to or extends from the
helicopter exterior but is not used nor is intended to be used in
operating or controlling a helicopter in flight and is not part of an
airframe or engine. Examples of external equipment are spotlights,
cameras, airborne signs, and cargo tanks and baskets.
External equipment may be attached to a helicopter as a Class A
Rotorcraft External Load Combination under 14 CFR part 133 (part 133)
``Rotorcraft External Load Operations'', or alternatively, the external
equipment may be attached to the helicopter as a change in type design
under Subpart D of part 21. The noise certification requirements do not
apply to any helicopter, regardless of airworthiness certification
category, that is designated exclusively for carrying external loads
pursuant to part 133. Section 133.51 states that ``[a] Rotorcraft
External-Load Operator Certificate is a current and valid airworthiness
certificate for each rotorcraft . . . listed by registration number on
a list attached to the certificate, when the rotorcraft is being used
in operations conducted under [part 133].'' However, when the original
helicopter noise certification rules were adopted in part 21, external
equipment was not excluded from the acoustical change provisions of
Sec. 21.93. Thus, except for helicopters operated under part 133, the
addition of external equipment is currently subject to the acoustical
change provisions of Sec. 21.93. This proposed change to Sec. 21.93
would reconcile the procedural treatment of external equipment added to
helicopters with the intent of Sec. 21.93(b)(4) by expanding the
acoustical change
[[Page 48791]]
exception to include carriage of external equipment.
While many helicopter operators would like to use their aircraft to
perform specialized operations that require the use of external
equipment, many of these operations do not take place because the cost
of complying with the noise regulations is financially impractical;
i.e., the cost of demonstrating compliance with the noise regulations
would substantially deplete any profit the operation might generate.
Some helicopter operators suggest that the current acoustical change
type certification procedures are hampering the growth of their
industry because compliance costs deter them from performing certain
operations that require the addition of external equipment.
History of Aircraft Noise Certification Regulations Relevant to This
Proposed Amendment
On November 3, 1969, the Administrator of the FAA adopted part 36
entitled ``Noise Standards: Aircraft Type Certification.'' That action
implemented the FAA's regulatory noise abatement program by prescribing
type certification noise standards for subsonic turbojet powered
airplanes. Procedural changes were concurrently made to part 21,
``Certification Procedures for Products and Parts,'' to provide
criteria and requirements for demonstrating compliance with the
specifications in part 36 (34 FR 13855, November 18, 1969). The noise
certification requirements of parts 21 and 36 are designed to promote
the incorporation of noise abatement technology into aircraft design.
Parts 21 and 36 have been amended as appropriate to add new aircraft
types to the certification requirements or change the technical
specifications as necessary. Subsequently, helicopter noise
certification requirements were adopted with amendment 36-14 to part 36
and amendment 21-61 to part 21 (53 FR 3534, February 5, 1988).
The first amendment to part 21 relevant to the original aircraft
noise certification regulation was amendment 21-27 (34 FR 18355,
November 10, 1969). That amendment established the general requirement
that an applicant must demonstrate compliance with the applicable
provisions of the part 36 procedures prior to issuance of an original,
amended, or supplemental type certificate. The same amendment to part
21 included the addition under Sec. 21.93(b) that specified an
``acoustical change'' as any voluntary change in type design of a
transport category or turbojet-powered airplane that may increase the
noise levels of that airplane. Section 21.93 was subsequently amended
in response to the promulgation of part 36 noise standards for
propeller-driven small airplanes (Amdt. 21-42; 40 FR 1029, January 6,
1975), supersonic airplanes (Amdt. 21-47; 43 FR 28406, June 29, 1978),
commuter category airplanes (Amdt. 21-59; 52 FR 1806, January 15,
1987), and helicopters (Amdt. 21-61; 53 FR 3534, February 5, 1988).
Section 21.93 has also been amended to exclude certain changes in
aircraft type design from the acoustical change requirements. The
necessity for exempting these changes in type design became apparent
only after experience was gained from implementation of the original
noise certification regulations for the aircraft type in question. For
turbojet-powered airplanes, amendment 21-56 (47 FR 756, January 7,
1982) excludes time-limited engine and/or nacelle changes, where the
change in type design specifies that the airplane may not be operated
for a period of more than 90 days, and amendment 21-62 (53 FR 16360,
May 6, 1988) excludes both gear down flight with one or more
retractable landing gear down during the entire flight and spare engine
and nacelle carriage external to the skin of the aircraft. For
propeller-driven commuter category and propeller-driven small
airplanes, amendment 21-63 (53 FR 47394, November 22, 1988) excludes
``antique'' airplanes (i.e., those airplanes that have flight time
before January 1, 1955) and land configured aircraft reconfigured with
floats and skis.
Synopsis of the Proposal
The FAA has determined that this proposed rulemaking would provide
benefits in the form of regulatory relief to the helicopter industry
and to individual helicopter operators. From a number of noise
certification studies, the FAA has concluded that this rulemaking will
result in little or no increase of public exposure to helicopter noise
emissions. The portion of the existing helicopter regulations relevant
to this rulemaking imposes an undue financial burden on the helicopter
industry and operators without providing any measurable benefit to the
public.
This proposal would amend the acoustical change provisions of
Sec. 21.93 to exclude helicopters that have been modified by the
addition or removal of external equipment mounted on the helicopter
airframe or floats (rigid or bag) and skis. The proposal would also
exclude certain changes in helicopter type design from the acoustical
change requirements to certain airframe changes made to accommodate the
external equipment, and to helicopter flight operations with doors and/
or windows removed or in an open position. The proposal also applies to
any operating limitations placed on, or removed from, the helicopter as
a consequence of the addition or removal of external equipment, floats,
and skis.
The FAA recognizes the utility aspect of the helicopter as an
aerial platform for external equipment. It is a common practice in the
helicopter industry to add or remove external equipment as mission
requirements vary. Although external equipment may be offered by the
original manufacturer of the helicopter, it is usually added as an
after-market addition by individual operators to meet specific mission
needs. Given the potential variety of external equipment, the nature of
the external equipment is not considered part of the basic design of a
given helicopter and does not influence the basic aerodynamic design or
the incorporation of noise abatement technology into the helicopter
design. As stated in the preamble of the final rule (cited previously)
for the original helicopter noise certification rulemaking, ``* * * the
[helicopter] noise standards apply [only] to internal load
configurations.''
This proposed rule is consistent with a similar provision in the
applicability section of the helicopter noise certification standard
approved by the ICAO under its International Standards and Recommended
Practices: Environmental Protection; Annex 16, Volume 1, Chapters 8 and
11 (Third Edition-July 1993). The proposed rule change would bring the
acoustical change provision in the U.S. noise certification regulations
into closer harmony with that used by foreign noise certification
authorities.
Details of the proposed amendment and limitations of the amendment
are provided in the following analysis.
Section 21.93 Classification of Changes in Type Design
Part 21 prescribes that certain types of aircraft, including
helicopters, must demonstrate compliance with the applicable
requirements of part 36 if a change in type design results in an
acoustical change. Section 21.93 specified an ``acoustical change'' as
any voluntary change in type design (including operational limitations)
that may increase the noise levels of an aircraft. The proposed rule,
applicable only to helicopters, would exclude the installation or
removal of external equipment from being considered an acoustical
change. The proposed rule
[[Page 48792]]
would specifically exclude from the acoustical change provision the
addition or removal of all external equipment where ``external
equipment'' means any instrument, mechanism, part, apparatus,
appurtenance, or accessory (e.g., spotlights, cameras and other optical
devices, public address systems, hoists, airborne signs, tow banners,
cargo tanks and baskets, emergency flotation gear, personnel platforms,
wire strike kits, crop spraying equipment, scientific apparatus and
their accessories) that is not used or intended to be used in operating
or controlling an aircraft in flight, that is attached to the
helicopter, and is not part of an airframe or engine. The proposed rule
would apply to changes in the airframe made to:
(1) Accommodate the addition or removal of external equipment;
(2) facilitate the use of external equipment; or
(3) facilitate the safe operation of the helicopter with external
equipment mounted on the helicopter.
Examples of airframe changes that would be excepted include
fairings, attachment hardware, cavities constructed in the airframe to
accommodate conformally attached equipment, and bubble windows. The
proposed rule would also exclude from the acoustical change provision
external load attaching means, the airworthiness certification of which
is specified in Secs. 27.865 and 29.865.
The proposed rule change would also exclude the addition or removal
of floats and skis on helicopters from the acoustical change provision.
The proposal would also make it clear that any changes in the operating
limitations placed on the helicopter as a consequence of the addition
or removal of external equipment, floats, and skis is not an acoustical
change. Similarly, it would also exclude flight operations conducted
with one or more doors and/or windows removed or in an open position.
The FAA has included addition or removal of floats and skis on
helicopters under this proposed rule change in order to provide the
same provision for helicopters as is currently provided small propeller
driven airplanes and propeller driven commuter category airplanes under
Sec. 21.93(b)(3). The acoustical change requirements of Sec. 21.93 do
not require a noise certification compliance demonstration for such
airplanes, and would not for helicopters under this proposal, because
the FAA did not have a rational basis to consider such design
configurations in the original rulemaking that established noise
certification requirements for these aircraft. While the additions of
floats and skis adversely affects the aerodynamic performance, and
consequently the noise levels, of both small airplanes and helicopters,
the FAA lacks the acoustical and performance data necessary to develop
noise certification regulations relevant to small airplanes and
helicopters that are reconfigured by the addition of floats or skis.
If a noise compliance demonstration is otherwise required for
compliance with part 36, the noise flight test must be conducted
without any external equipment, floats, or skis mounted to the
helicopter and with doors and windows mounted and closed (i.e.,
aerodynamically clean configuration) unless otherwise approved or
required by the FAA. In granting exemptions and establishing conditions
of exemptions, the rationale for the FAA's decision will be based on
whether or not the measured helicopter noise levels from a proposed
noise compliance demonstration would be representative of a ``clean
configured'' helicopter. For example, assume a cavity was created in
the fuselage (as a related airframe change) to accommodate a
conformally (flush) fitted camera. Under the proposed rule change, both
the camera and the cavity would be exempt from the acoustical change
requirements of part 21. However, in the event of any future noise
testing of that helicopter for a change in type design unrelated to the
camera and cavity, such a noise test without the camera mounted and the
cavity exposed would likely lead to unrepresentative noise levels due
to alteration of the aerodynamic performance of the helicopter. In this
example, during the actual noise test for the unrelated change in type
design, the FAA would probably require that the flush-mounted camera be
inserted in its associated fuselage cavity or that the fuselage cavity
be covered in a manner that would return the fuselage to its original
aerodynamic shape. Similarly, any analysis for the purpose of
demonstrating a ``nonacoustical change'' under Sec. 21.93 must assume
performance levels consistent with an aerodynamically clean helicopter
(relative to the changes in type design excepted under this proposed
rulemaking). That is, a decrease in a noise certification level
effected by the addition of equipment exempted under this proposed
rulemaking may not be used to ``mathematically' offset an increase in
noise from a change in type design not affected by this proposed
rulemaking. For example, assuming the certification basis for a given
helicopter is part 36 Appendix J, an increase in flyover noise
certification level caused by the upgrade of a transmission may not be
offset by the decrease in noise from the assumed addition of external
equipment, floats or skis as part of the change in type design for the
transmission.
The FAA also proposed to delete the current text in
Sec. 21.93(b)(4) (i) and (ii). These paragraphs indicate examples of
design changes which would be considered acoustical changes. Since
Sec. 21.93(b) already makes it clear that ``any voluntary change in the
type design of an aircraft that may increase the noise levels of the
aircraft is an `acoustical change' * * *'' existing paragraphs
Sec. 21.93(b)(4) (i) and (ii) may be erroneously interpreted to
indicate that (any) change to a muffler (including a change to a
quieter muffler) is by regulation an acoustical change. The existing
paragraphs (i) and (ii) do not represent a regulatory requirement and
add nothing toward the interpretation of the acoustical change
requirements for helicopters. The proposed new text addresses the
definition of external equipment and the exclusions discussed earlier
in this synopsis.
During development of this proposed rule change, the FAA has
examined such factors as the utility aspect of the helicopter mission,
the necessity for the addition or removal of external equipment to meet
mission needs, the relevance of such equipment with regard to the
incorporation of noise abatement technology in the design of the
helicopter, and the desire for commonality of U.S. noise certification
regulations with relevant international standards and foreign national
regulations. After consideration of these factors, the Administrator
has determined that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
criteria set forth for proposing and amending aircraft noise abatement
regulations under the authority of Sec. 611(d) of the Federal Aviation
Act of 1958.
International Compatibility
The FAA has reviewed corresponding ICAO standards and JAA
regulations, where they exist. These proposed amendments would make
U.S. helicopter noise certification regulations more consistent with
the ICAO standards.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this proposed rule.
[[Page 48793]]
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
Three principal requirements pertain to the economic impacts of
changes to the Federal Regulations. First, Executive Order 12866
directs Federal agencies to promulgate new regulations or modify
existing regulations only if the expected benefits to society outweigh
the expected costs. Second, the regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Finally, the Office of Management and Budget directs
agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on international
trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
rule: (1) will generate benefits exceeding costs; (2) is not
``significant'' as defined in the Executive Order and DOT's policies
and procedures; (3) will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities; and (4) will lessen restraints on
international trade. These analyses, available in the docket, are
summarized below.
Benefits
The proposed rule would provide regulatory relief and a cost
savings of $31,690,468 (non-discounted) or $23,409,159 discounted, over
a ten year period, to helicopter manufacturers, modifiers, and
operators. Of this amount, the projected cost savings for part 36 noise
certification testing under Appendix H for major helicopter
manufacturers is $4,800,000 (non-discounted) or $4,264,244 discounted;
Appendix J Testing for light helicopter manufacturers, $3,000,000 (non-
discounted) or $2,330,305 discounted; and Appendix J Testing for
modifiers, $22,500,000 (non-discounted) or $15,803,025 discounted. The
FAA would also realize a cost savings under these appendices: Appendix
H, $222,460 (non-discounted) or $178,312 discounted; Appendix J,
$231,740 (non-discounted) or $173,525 discounted; and Appendix J (for
modifiers), $936,268 (non-discounted) or $659,748 discounted.
Costs
From the number of noise certification studies, the FAA has learned
that allowing applicants to attach external equipment to their
helicopters will result in no net increase in helicopter noise or, at
worst, insignificant increases in noise levels.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
disproportionately burdened by government regulations. The RFA requires
a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a rule would have a significant
economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a substantial
number of small entities. FAA Order 2100.14A, Regulatory Flexibility
Criteria and Guidance prescribes standards for complying with RFA
review requirements in FAA rulemaking actions. The order defines
``small entities'' in terms of size thresholds, ``significant economic
impact'' in terms of annualized cost threshold, and ``substantial
number'' as a number that is not less than eleven and that is more than
one-third of the small entities subject to the proposed rule.
The FAA has determined that, in accordance to the above order, the
proposed rule to part 21 would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule would
directly affect two types of entities: (1) Light helicopter
manufacturers, and (2) small helicopter modifiers.
For small aircraft and aircraft parts manufacturers, Order 2100.14A
specifies a size threshold for classification as a small entity as 75
or fewer employees. Based upon this size threshold, all of the affected
U.S. manufacturers are large. For the purpose of the regulatory
flexibility determination, an aircraft modifier is considered a small
entity if it has 200 or fewer employees.
The FAA concludes that a substantial number of small entities (less
than one third) would not be significantly affected by the proposed
rule. Therefore, the proposed rule would not impose a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Trade Impact Assessment
The FAA has determined that the proposed rule would neither affect
the sale of foreign aviation products and services in the United States
nor the sale of U.S. products and services in foreign countries. This
determination is based on the FAA's contention that the proposed rule
would parallel more closely the U.S. standards with foreign standards
for noise certification of external equipment.
Federalism Implications
The regulations herein will not have substantial direct effects on
the states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 12612, it is determined that this proposed rule would not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Environmental Analysis
Pursuant to the Department of Transportation ``Policies and
Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FAA Order 1050.1D),
a draft environmental analysis will be prepared and placed in the
docket.
Conclusion
The FAA has determined that this proposed rule: (1) is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
significant regulatory action under 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. In addition, this proposed rule would have little or
no effect on trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business
overseas, or on foreign firms doing business in the United States.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 21
Aircraft, Helicopters, Noise control.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
14 CFR part 21 as follows:
PART 21--CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS
1. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1344, 1348(c), 1352, 1354(a), 1355,
1421 through 1431, 1502, 1651(b)(2); 42 U.S.C. 7572; E.O. 11514; 49
U.S.C. 106(g).
2. Section 21.93 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 21.93 Classification of changes in type design.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Helicopters except:
(i) Those helicopters that are designated exclusively:
(A) For ``agricultural aircraft operations'', as defined in
Sec. 137.3 of this chapter, as effective on January 1, 1966;
(B) For dispensing fire fighting materials; or
(C) For carrying external loads, as defined in Sec. 133.1(b) of
this chapter, as effective on December 20, 1976.
[[Page 48794]]
(ii) Those helicopters modified by installation or removal of
external equipment. For purposes of this paragraph, ``external
equipment'' means any instrument, mechanism, part, apparatus,
appurtenance, or accessory that is attached to, or extends from the
helicopter exterior but is not used nor is intended to be used in
operating or controlling a helicopter in flight and is not part of an
airframe or engine. An ``acoustical change'' does not include:
(A) Addition or removal of external equipment;
(B) Changes in the airframe made to accommodate the addition or
removal of external equipment, to provide for an external load
attaching means, to facilitate the use of external equipment or
external loads, or to facilitate the safe operation of the helicopter
with external equipment mounted to, or external loads carried by, the
helicopter;
(C) Reconfiguration of the helicopter by the addition or removal of
floats and skis;
(D) Flight with one or more doors and/or windows removed or in an
open position; or
(E) Any changes in the operational limitations placed on the
helicopter as a consequence of the addition or removal of external
equipment, floats, and skis, or flight operations with doors and/or
windows removed or in an open position.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 11, 1995.
James D. Erickson,
Director, Office of Environment and Energy.
[FR Doc. 95-23208 Filed 9-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
