[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26050-26052]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10061]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-D-1370]

COVID-19: Developing Drugs and Biological Products for Treatment
or Prevention; Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled ``COVID-19:
Developing Drugs and Biological Products for Treatment or Prevention.''
This guidance describes FDA's current recommendations regarding phase 2
or phase 3 trials for drugs or biological products under development
for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. Given the public health
emergency presented by COVID-19, this guidance document is being
implemented without prior public comment because FDA has determined
that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate, but it
remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency's good
guidance practices. This final guidance revises and replaces the final
guidance of the same name issued

on May 11, 2020. Revisions were made to address the evolving landscape
of COVID-19 drug development, including the emergence of SARS-CoV-2
variants and the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. The revision to
this guidance was posted to the FDA website on February 22, 2021.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on May 12, 2021. The guidance document is immediately in
effect, but it remains subject to comment in accordance with the
Agency's good guidance practices.

ADDRESSES: You may submit electronic or written comments on Agency
guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2020-D-1370 for ``COVID-19: Developing Drugs and Biological
Products for Treatment or Prevention.'' Received comments will be
placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or the Office of
Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eithu Lwin, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 22, Rm. 6236, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``COVID-19: Developing Drugs and Biological Products for
Treatment or Prevention.'' There is currently an outbreak of
respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus. The virus has been
named SARS-CoV-2, and the disease it causes has been named Coronavirus
Disease 2019 (COVID-19). On January 31, 2020, the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) issued a declaration of a public health
emergency related to COVID-19 and mobilized the Operating Divisions of
HHS. The public health emergency declaration has been subsequently
renewed. In addition, on March 13, 2020, the President declared a
national emergency in response to COVID-19. The revision to this
guidance was posted to the FDA website on February 22, 2021.
    This guidance describes FDA's current recommendations regarding
phase 2 or phase 3 trials for drugs under development to treat or
prevent COVID-19. This guidance focuses on the patient population,
trial design, efficacy endpoints, safety considerations, and
statistical considerations for such trials. Drugs should have undergone
sufficient development before their evaluation in phase 2 or phase 3.
    This guidance focuses on the development of drugs with direct
antiviral activity or immunomodulatory activity. However, the
recommendations in this guidance may be applicable to development plans
for drugs for COVID-19 with other mechanisms of action. The mechanism
of action of the drug may impact key study design

elements (e.g., population, endpoints, safety assessments, duration of
followup, etc.).
    Preventative vaccines are not within the scope of this guidance.
Nor does this guidance provide general recommendations on early drug
development in COVID-19, such as use of animal models.
    In light of the public health emergency related to COVID-19
declared by the Secretary of HHS, FDA has determined that prior public
participation for this guidance is not feasible or appropriate and is
issuing this guidance without prior public comment (see section
701(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
371(h)(1)(C)(i)) and 21 CFR 10.115(g)(2)). This guidance document is
being implemented immediately, but it remains subject to comment in
accordance with the Agency's good guidance practices.
    This guidance is intended to remain in effect for the duration of
the public health emergency related to COVID-19 declared by HHS,
including any renewals made by the Secretary in accordance with section
319(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d(a)(2)).
However, the recommendations and processes described in the guidance
are expected to assist the Agency more broadly in its continued efforts
to assist sponsors in the clinical development of drugs for the
treatment of COVID-19 beyond the termination of the COVID-19 public
health emergency and reflect the Agency's current thinking on this
issue. Therefore, within 60 days following the termination of the
public health emergency, FDA intends to revise and replace this
guidance with any appropriate changes based on comments received on
this guidance and the Agency's experience with implementation.
    This final guidance revises and replaces the final guidance with
the same title issued on May 19, 2020 (85 FR 29949). The revision
addresses the potential impact of the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants
and the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Additional updates
reflecting the evolving landscape of COVID-19 drug development were
made to the recommendations on patient population, trial design,
efficacy endpoints, safety considerations, and statistical
considerations. In addition, FDA considered comments received on the
previous guidance, and editorial changes were made to improve clarity.
    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on ``COVID-19: Developing Drugs and Biological
Products for Treatment or Prevention.'' It does not establish any
rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can
use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 314 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0001; the collections of information in 21 CFR parts 312
and 320 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014; the
collections of information in 21 CFR part 58 regarding good laboratory
practice for nonclinical laboratory studies have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0119; the collections of information in 21 CFR
parts 50 and 56 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0130;
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 320 have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0291; the collections of information in
21 CFR part 601 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338;
the collections of information in FDA's draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Formal Meetings Between the FDA and Sponsors or Applicants
of Prescription Drug User Fee Act Products'' have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0429; the collections of information in FDA's
final guidance for clinical trial sponsors entitled ``Establishment and
Operation of Clinical Trial Data Monitoring Committees'' have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0581; and the collections of
information in FDA's final guidance for industry entitled ``Oversight
of Clinical Investigations--A Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring'' have
been approved under OMB control number 0910-0733.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information-biologics, https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-issues/covid-19-related-guidance-documents-industry-fda-staff-and-other-stakeholders, or
https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: May 7, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-10061 Filed 5-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 203 (Tuesday, October 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66549-66550]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13417-008]

Western Technical College; ReNew Hydro Power, LLC; Notice of
Application for Transfer of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Protests

    On September 14, 2020, Western Technical College (transferor) and
ReNew Hydro Power, LLC (transferee) filed jointly an application for
the transfer of license of the Angelo Dam Hydroelectric Project No.
13417. The project is located on the La Crosse River, Monroe County,
Wisconsin.
    The applicants seek Commission approval to transfer the license for
the Angelo Dam Hydroelectric Project from the transferor to the
transferee.
    Applicants Contact: For transferor: Roger Stanford, President,
Western Technical College, 400 7th St. N, La Crosse, WI 54601, Phone:
(608) 785-9123.
    For transferee: Christopher or Beth Cutts, Manager, ReNew Hydro
Power, LLC, W7547 County Road P., Wild Rose, WI 54984, Phone: (920)
765-2193.
    FERC Contact: Anumzziatta Purchiaroni,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests:
30 days from the date that the Commission issues this notice. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments,
motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance,

please contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866)
208-3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY).
    In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to, Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any
other carrier must be addressed to, Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include docket
number P-13417-008. Comments emailed to Commission staff are not
considered part of the Commission record.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 14, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23158 Filed 10-19-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

MEMORANDUM

TO:		Toni Jones, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

FROM:  	Eastern Research Group, Inc.

DATE:  	November 21, 2011

SUBJECT:  	Economic Impact Analysis: Reconsideration Proposal Inputs
Comparison

An economic impact analysis for existing CISWI units was conducted at
promulgation, using inputs presented previously in a separate
memorandum.1 During the reconsideration process, changes were made to
the CISWI inventory, emission limits, and control cost calculations.
Almost all of these changes occurred within the energy recovery unit and
waste-burning kiln subcategories of CISWI units. Consequently, the
inputs used for analyzing economic impacts have changed as well. This
memorandum compares the economic impact inputs used at promulgation to
the inputs used for the reconsideration analyses.

Changes in Economic Inputs

Table 1 shows the list of facilities in the CISWI inventory and their
corresponding lowest cost compliance options at the final rule (February
2011), reconsideration proposal, and the difference between both
estimates. For reconsideration, five facilities (14 units) were added to
the inventory (these are indicated in red text), and five facilities (7
units) were removed from the inventory (these are indicated in gray).
Three of the facilities removed from the inventory were small entities.

Over all existing units, the total cost of the lowest cost option
increased by $268 million in capital costs and $53 million in annual
costs. As shown in Table 1, much of this increase can be attributed to
the compliance costs for the 14 units that were added to the inventory
(none of which belong to small entities).

For small entities that remain in the CISWI inventory, costs are the
same at reconsideration as they were at promulgation. The three small
entities that were removed from the inventory decreased the overall
small entity costs by $43 million in capital costs and $20 million in
annual costs.

References

1.  “Revised Economic Impact Analysis Inputs for Existing CISWI
Units” Memorandum from Eastern Research Group, Inc. to Toni Jones,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  January 12, 2011.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I honestly believe that cigarettes are the best alternative to traditional combustion cigarettes. Modern/advanced cigarettes saved my life, my relation ship and my job by taking this away from people like myself you are affectively sentencing us to death. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

Best, Sumair A Ali 678-431-5479 <EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37150-37151]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14950]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 298-082]

Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Temporary variance of license flow
requirements.
    b. Project No.: 298-082.
    c. Date Filed: July 1, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Southern California Edison Company (licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Kaweah Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the East Fork, Marble Fork,
and Middle Fork of the Kaweah River in Tulare County, California, and
occupies lands of the United States administered by the Bureau of Land
Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Wayne Allen, Southern California Edison
Company, 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead, California 91770; (626)
302-9741<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Brian Bartos,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is August 9, 2021.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's
eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without
prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may
submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-298-082. Comments emailed to Commission staff
are not considered part of the Commission record.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests Commission
approval through the end of 2021 for a temporary variance of the
minimum flow requirements below the Kaweah No. 1

and No. 2 diversions, as required by Article 405 of the project
license. The licensee states that the projected runoff is extremely
low, and current runoff in the Kaweah River and East Fork Kaweah River
is at the lowest level in 20 years. Being that the licensee cannot
accurately forecast long-term runoff during this extreme drought event,
it is proactively requesting the temporary variance to allow it to
balance available instream flow with its contractual water rights
obligations, should it become necessary. Should drought conditions
persist and the temporary variance is implemented, the licensee would
deliver the minimum amount of water necessary through the respective
diversion in order to meet its contractual water rights obligations;
the licensee would not generate at the respective powerhouse(s) during
implementation of the variance. The licensee would only implement the
variance in the event that low inflow into the diversion dam(s) impairs
the ability to meet both minimum instream flow releases and domestic
water supply requirements. Additionally, the licensee proposes to
monitor and report flow conditions to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and California Department of Fish and Wildlife during the temporary
variance.
    l. Locations of the Application: The Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of
this document via the internet through the Commission's website at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. At this
time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free,
(866) 208-3676 or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. A copy of all other filings in reference to this
application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 385.2010.

    Dated: July 8, 2021.
Kimberly Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14950 Filed 7-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75669-75670]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29620]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71018]

Order Granting a Temporary Exemption Pursuant to Section 36(a)(1)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 From the Filing Deadline
Specified in Rule 613(a)(1) of the Exchange Act

December 6, 2013.
    Rule 613(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'') \1\ requires the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') and the eighteen registered national securities exchanges
(collectively, the ``SROs'') to ``jointly file on or before 270 days
from the date of publication of the Adopting Release [for Rule 613 of
the Exchange Act \2\] in the Federal Register a national market system
plan to govern the creation, implementation, and maintenance of a
consolidated audit trail and central repository as required by [the
rule].'' The Adopting Release for Rule 613 was published in the Federal
Register on August 1, 2012,\3\ thus requiring the national market
system plan (``NMS plan'') to be filed on or before April 28, 2013.\4\
On March 7, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') granted a request from the SROs for a temporary
exemption from this deadline until December 6, 2013.\5\ On November 8,
2013, the SROs filed an application, pursuant to Rule 0-12 under the
Exchange Act,\6\ to request the Commission to grant a temporary
exemption under Section 36 of the Exchange Act,\7\ from the deadline
specified in Rule 613(a)(1) of the Exchange Act \8\ for submitting the
NMS plan to the Commission until September 30, 2014.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 242.613(a)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.613.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67457 (July 18, 2012),
77 FR 45722 (August 1, 2012) (``Adopting Release'').
    \4\ April 28, 2013, was a Sunday. Therefore, in accordance with
Rule 160(a) of the Commission Rules of Practice, the deadline for
filing the NMS plan was Monday, April 29, 2013.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69060, 78 FR 15771
(March 12, 2013); and letter from Robert L.D. Colby, Executive Vice
President and Chief Legal Officer, FINRA, to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated February 7, 2013 (``February 7, 2013
Letter'').
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.0-12.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm.
    \8\ 17 CFR 242.613(a)(1).
    \9\ See Letter from Robert L.D. Colby, Executive Vice President
and Chief Legal Officer, FINRA, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated November 7, 2013 (the ``Current Request Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In their Current Request Letter, the SROs explain that on February
26, 2013, they published a Request for Proposal (``RFP'') to solicit
bids from which they will select an entity to serve as the consolidated
audit trail (``CAT'') plan processor to build, operate, administer, and
maintain the CAT.\10\ Thirty-one firms, including four distinct SRO
groups, initially indicated that they planned to submit bids on the
RFP.\11\ The SROs further state in the Current Request Letter that
following the publication of the RFP, potential bidders and members of
the public, including broker-dealer members of the SROs, expressed
interest in the process by which the SROs will review and evaluate
bids, narrow down the list of bids, use those bids in formulating the
CAT NMS Plan, and, ultimately, select the CAT plan processor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the February 7, 2013 Letter, the SROs stated that an RFP
process was necessary prior to filing an NMS plan pursuant to Rule
613 (``CAT NMS Plan''). The SROs explained their belief that such a
process would ensure that potential alternative solutions for
creating the consolidated audit trail could be presented to the SROs
for their consideration, and would provide the SROs with information
necessary to prepare a detailed cost/benefit analysis as required by
Rule 613. See February 7, 2013 Letter, supra note 5.
    \11\ According to the SROs, since that time, seven firms have
formally notified the SROs of their intent to withdraw as primary
bidders. See Current Request Letter, supra note 9. Of the seven
firms that formally notified the SROs of their intent to withdraw as
primary bidders, two are SRO groups. See<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(last
visited November 19, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SROs state in the Current Request Letter that they solicited
views from potential bidders regarding whether they preferred to know
the process the SROs will follow to review, evaluate, and select a
bidder in advance of submitting their bids and whether that process
could influence either a decision regarding whether to submit a bid or
the contents of a bid. The SROs represent that many potential bidders
indicated that knowing the process by which the SROs will choose the
plan processor is important to finalizing their bids. According to the
SROs, the potential bidders also generally expressed the view that
providing bidders with four weeks between approval of a selection
process and the submission deadline for the bids would be an
appropriate timeframe to allow bidders to make any changes to their
bids in light of the approved evaluation and selection process. Based
on this

feedback, the SROs filed with the Commission an NMS plan to govern the
SROs' process for the selection of a CAT plan processor, and for
mitigating conflicts of interest that might arise in the process (the
``Selection NMS Plan'').\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Commission published the Selection NMS Plan for notice
and comment. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70892 (November
15, 2013), 78 FR 66910 (November 21, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Current Request Letter, the SROs state that a temporary
exemption is necessary and appropriate regardless of whether the
Commission approves the Selection NMS Plan. Specifically, the SROs note
that if the Selection NMS Plan is approved, they believe it will take
``approximately seven months from the receipt of the bids to review and
evaluate the bids, perform the in-depth and thorough analysis . . .
required by Rule 613, and draft the CAT NMS plan for submission to the
SEC.'' \13\ The SROs further state that ``[b]ecause the content of the
bids is critical to the analysis needed to draft the CAT NMS Plan, the
SROs estimate that seven months following the receipt of bids is
necessary to ensure that they can fully address the considerations
enumerated in Rule 613, including a discussion of the costs and
benefits of not only the proposed solution(s) but also of the
alternative solutions considered but not proposed as the solution in
the CAT NMS Plan, so that the Commission and the public have
sufficiently detailed information to carefully consider all aspects of
the CAT NMS Plan ultimately submitted by the SROs.'' \14\ If the
Selection NMS Plan is not approved, the SROs explain that they will
need the temporary exemption to allow bidders additional time to
finalize their bids, and allow the SROs additional time to develop an
alternative process for evaluating the bids, developing the CAT NMS
Plan, and selecting the CAT plan processor.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Current Request Letter, supra note 9.
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 36 of the Exchange Act \16\ authorizes the Commission, by
rule, regulation, or order, to exempt, either conditionally or
unconditionally, any person, security, or transaction, or any class or
classes of persons, securities, or transactions, from any provision or
provisions of the Exchange Act or any rule or regulation thereunder, to
the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, and is consistent with the protection of investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate in the public interest,
and is consistent with the protection of investors, to grant the SROs a
temporary exemption from the deadline for filing the CAT NMS Plan
contained in Rule 613(a)(1) until September 30, 2014. The Commission
believes that granting the exemption is appropriate in light of the
need for the SROs to establish a deadline for finalizing and submitting
bids in response to the RFP; to evaluate the bids submitted and select
the CAT Plan Processor under the Selection NMS Plan, if the Selection
NMS Plan is approved by the Commission, or an alternative process if
the Selection NMS Plan is not approved by the Commission; and to draft
the CAT NMS Plan.
    Accordingly, it is hereby ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the
Exchange Act,\17\ that the SROs are temporarily exempted from the
deadline for submitting the NMS plan to govern the creation,
implementation, and maintenance of a consolidated audit trail and
central repository contained in Rule 613(a)(1) \18\ until September 30,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm.
    \18\ 17 CFR 242.613(a)(1).

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29620 Filed 12-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 119 (Thursday, June 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28545-28546]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12995]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Noise Exposure Map Notice for Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New
Jersey

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA announces its determination that the noise exposure
maps submitted by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey for
Teterboro Airport are in compliance with applicable requirements.

DATES: The effective date of the FAA's determination on the noise
exposure maps is June 15, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eastern Region Airports Division (AEA-
600), Andrew Brooks, Environmental Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, AEA-600, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434,
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA finds
that the noise exposure maps submitted for Teterboro Airport under the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et. seq (Aviation Safety and Noise
Abatement Act) and 14 CFR part 150 are in compliance with applicable
requirements of 14 CFR part 150, effective January 13, 2004.
    Under 49 U.S.C. Section 47503 of the Aviation Safety and Noise
Abatement Act (hereinafter referred to as ``the Act''), an airport
operator may submit to the FAA noise exposure maps which meet
applicable regulations and which depict non-compatible land uses as of
the date of submission of such maps, a description of projected
aircraft operations during a forecast period that is at least five (5)
years in the future, and the ways in which such operations will affect
such maps. The Act requires such maps to be developed in consultation
with interested and affected parties in the local community, government
agencies, and persons using the airport. An airport operator who has
submitted noise exposure maps that are found by the FAA to be in
compliance with the requirements of 14 CFR part 150, promulgated
pursuant to the Act, may submit a noise compatibility program for FAA
approval which sets forth the measures the operator has taken or
proposes to take to reduce existing non-compatible uses and prevent the
introduction of additional non-compatible uses.
    The FAA has completed its review of the noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation submitted by the Port Authority of New York
and New Jersey. The documentation that constitutes the ``Noise Exposure
Maps'' (NEM) as defined in Section 150.7 includes a 2016 Base Year NEM,
Figure 5-1, and a 2021 Future Year NEM, Figure 5-2, located in Chapter
5 of the NEM Report. The figures contained within Chapter 5 are scaled
to fit within the report context; however, the official, to scale, 2016
Base Year NEM and 2021 Future Year NEM are identified as Figures 5-8
and 5-9 and are both located in an attachment to the official NEM
Report submittal.
    The Noise Exposure Maps contain current and forecast information
including the depiction of the airport and its boundaries, the runway
configurations, land uses such as single family residential; multi-
family residential; mobile home; transient lodging (hotel, motel,
etc.); school, university, or daycare; place of worship; recreational,
open space, and cemetary; commercial use; manufacturing and production;
public use; and vacant or unidentified, and those areas within the Day
Night Average Sound Level (DNL) 65, 70 and 75 noise contours. Estimates
for the area within these contours for the 2016 Base Year and 2021
Future Year are shown in Table 5-4 of Chapter 5 of the NEM Report.
Estimates of the residential population within the 2016 Base Year and
2021 Future Year noise contours are also shown in Table 5-2 of Chapter
5 of the NEM Report. Figure 2-5 in Chapter 2 displays the location of
noise monitoring sites. Flight tracks are found in Figures 4-6 and 4-7
of Chapter 4 and detailed in Appedix D. The type and frequency of
aircraft operations (including nighttime) are found in Appendix D.1,
Tables 7 and 8.
    As discussed in Chapter 6 of the NEM Report, the Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey provided the general public the opportunity to
review and comment on the NEMs. This public comment period opened on
September 15, 2016 and closed on October 17, 2016. A public workshop
for the Draft NEMs was held on September 22, 2016. All comments
received during the public comment period and throughout the
development of the NEMs, as well as responses to these comments, are
contained in Appendix H of the NEM Report.
    Following the closure of the public review period, final review of
the Noise Exposure Maps showed that 21 parcels were identified with the
incorrect land use in the Draft Noise Exposure Maps distributed to the
public. These parcels have been correctly identified on the

Final Noise Exposure Map submittal. The change to the identification of
these parcels did not alter the depiction of the noise contour lines in
any fashion.
    The FAA has determined that these noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation are in compliance with applicable
requirements. This determination is effective on June 15, 2017.
    FAA's determination on an airport operator's noise exposure maps is
limited to a finding that the maps were developed in accordance with
the procedures contained in Appendix A of 14 CFR part 150. Such
determination does not constitute approval of the applicant's data,
information or plans, or a commitment to approve a noise compatibility
program or to fund the implementation of that program. If questions
arise concerning the precise relationship of specific properties to
noise exposure contours depicted on a noise exposure map submitted
under Section 47503 of the Act, it should be noted that the FAA is not
involved in any way in determining the relative locations of specific
properties with regard to the depicted noise contours, or in
interpreting the noise exposure maps to resolve questions concerning,
for example, which properties should be covered by the provisions of
Section 47506 of the Act. These functions are inseparable from the
ultimate land use control and planning responsibilities of local
government. These local responsibilities are not changed in any way
under Part 150 or through FAA's review of noise exposure maps.
Therefore, the responsibility for the detailed overlaying of noise
exposure contours onto the map depicting properties on the surface
rests exclusively with the airport operator that submitted those maps,
or with those public agencies and planning authorities with which
consultation is required under Section 47503 of the Act. The FAA has
relied on the certification by the airport operator, under Section
150.21, that the statutorily required consultation has been
accomplished.
    Copies of the full noise exposure map documentation and of the
FAA's evaluation of the maps are available for examination at the
following locations:

Federal Aviation Administration, Eastern Region, Airports Division,
AEA-600, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434
Federal Aviation Administration, New York Airports District Office, 1
Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Aviation Department, 4
World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, 18th Floor, New York, New
York 10007

    Issued in Jamaica, NY on June 15, 2017.
Steven M. Urlass,
Director, Airports Division, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-12995 Filed 6-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 69)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 18259-18262]
[DOCID:fr11ap06-35]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0131; FRL-8157-4]
RIN 2060-AM46

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for the Import of Halon-1301 Aircraft Fire Extinguishing
Vessels

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
exempt entities that import aircraft fire extinguishing spherical
pressure vessels containing halon-1301 (``aircraft halon bottles'') for
hydrostatic testing from the import petitioning requirements for used
controlled substances. The petitioning requirements compel importers to
submit detailed information to the Administrator concerning the origin
of the substance at least forty working days before a shipment is to
leave a foreign port of export. This action proposes to reduce the
administrative burden on entities that are importing aircraft halon-
1301 bottles for the purpose of maintaining these bottles to commercial
safety specifications and standards set forth in Federal Aviation
Authority airworthiness directives. This action does not propose to
exempt entities importing bulk quantities of halon-1301 in containers
that are not being imported for purposes of hydrostatic testing.
    In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's Federal
Register, we are creating this exemption as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this
exemption in the preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no
adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.
If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the direct final rule
and it will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any persons
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

DATES: Written comments on the companion direct final rule must be
received on or before May 11, 2006 or by May 26, 2006 if a hearing is
requested. Any party requesting a public hearing must notify the
contact person listed below by 5 p.m. eastern standard time on April
21, 2006. If a hearing is requested it will be held April 25, 2006. If
a hearing is held, commenters will have 30 days to submit follow up
comments before the close of the comment period. Persons interested in
attending a public hearing should consult with the contact person below
regarding the location and time of the hearing.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2005-
0131, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, attn: Hodayah Finman
     Mail: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: EPA
Air Docket, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108, Mail
Code 6102T, Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0131. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA

West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hodayah Finman, EPA, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and
Radiation (6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460,
(202) 343-9246.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA believes that the revision to the
import petition process for the import of halon aircraft bottles
described in the direct final rule published in today's Federal
Register is noncontroversial; however, should the Agency receive
adverse comment on the companion direct final rule, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. All adverse comments received will be addressed in a subsequent
final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this document. For additional information, see the
direct final rule published in the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register.

Table of Contents

I. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments

    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

Summary of Supporting Analysis

I. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines a
``significant'' regulatory action as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal government or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this is a ``significant regulatory action'' within the
meaning of the Executive Order. EPA has submitted this action to OMB
for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or
recommendations will be documented in the public record.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
Current recordkeeping and reporting requirements under 40 CFR 82.13
allow EPA to implement the provisions of today's action. Today's action
will reduce the reporting burden that would otherwise be required under
40 CFR 82.13(g) by removing the requirement to submit information to
EPA prior to each import of aircraft halon bottles. OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-
0170, EPA ICR number 1432.25. A copy of the OMB approved Information
Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection
Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T); 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566-
1672. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR
are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) a small business that is primarily engaged in
the hydrostatic testing of halon aircraft bottles as defined in NAIC
code 541380 with annual receipts less than $10,000,000 (based on Small
Business Administration size standards); (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    This proposed rule will reduce the administrative burden on all
entities who import aircraft halon bottles. We have therefore concluded
that today's proposed rule will relieve regulatory burden for all
affected small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small
governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of
EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental
mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on
compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    Section 203 of UMRA requires the Agency to establish a plan for
obtaining input from and informing, educating, and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
Section 204 requires the Agency to develop a process to allow elected
state, local, and tribal government officials to provide input in the
development of any proposal containing a significant Federal
intergovernmental mandate.
    Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provision of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. This rule imposes no enforceable
duty on any State, local or tribal government or the private sector.
Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202
and 205 of UMRA. EPA has also determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments; therefore, EPA is not required to develop a plan
with regard to small governments under section 203. Finally, because
this rule does not contain a significant intergovernmental mandate, the
Agency is not required to develop a process to obtain input from
elected state, local, and tribal officials under section 204.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    This rule does not have federalism implications. It 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. Today's rule is expected to
primarily affect importers and exporters of halons. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
does not impose any enforceable duties on communities of Indian tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks
    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    While this proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order
because it is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866 and
this rule does not pose an adverse health effect to children, we
nonetheless have reason to believe that the environmental, health, or
safety risk addressed by the underlying Ozone Protection Program
regulations may have a disproportionate effect on children. Depletion
of stratospheric ozone results in greater transmission of the sun's
ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the earth's surface. The following
studies describe the effects on children of excessive exposure to UV
radiation: (1) Westerdahl J, Olsson H, Ingvar C. ``At what age do
sunburn episodes play a crucial role for the development of malignant
melanoma,'' Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 1647-54; (2) Elwood JM, Jopson J.
``Melanoma and sun exposure: an overview of published studies,'' Int J
Cancer 1997; 73:198-203; (3) Armstrong BK. ``Melanoma: childhood or
lifelong sun exposure'' In: Grobb JJ, Stern RS, Mackie RM, Weinstock
WA, eds. ``Epidemiology, causes and prevention of skin diseases,'' 1st
ed. London, England: Blackwell Science, 1997: 63-6; (4) Whiteman D.,
Green A. ``Melanoma and Sunburn,'' Cancer Causes Control, 1994: 5:564-
72; (5) Kricker A, Armstrong, BK, English, DR, Heenan, PJ. ``Does
intermittent sun exposure cause basal cell carcinoma? A case control
study in Western Australia,'' Int J Cancer 1995; 60: 489-94; (6)
Gallagher, RP, Hill, GB, Bajdik, CD, et. al. ``Sunlight exposure,
pigmentary factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer I, Basal
cell carcinoma,'' Arch Dermatol 1995; 131: 157-63; (7) Armstrong, BK.
``How sun exposure causes skin cancer: an epidemiological
perspective,'' Prevention of Skin Cancer. 2004. 89-116.
    EPA anticipates that this rule will have a positive impact on the
environment and human health by removing a disincentive to preventive
maintenance of aircraft halon bottles and reducing the likelihood of
accidental emissions. Thus, this proposed rule is not expected to
increase the impacts on children's health from stratospheric ozone
depletion.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have
concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy
effects.
I. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in
its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and

business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This rulemaking does not
involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of
any voluntary consensus standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Chemicals, Exports, Halon, Imports, Ozone Layer, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 5, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06-3462 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 130)]
[Notices]
[Page 32902-32903]
[DOCID:fr09jy09-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-438-000]

CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice of
Application

June 30, 2009.
    Take notice that on June 23, 2009, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company (CEGT), 1111 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas
77002, filed in Docket No. CP09-438-000, an application pursuant to
Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the
Commission's regulations, requesting authorization to abandon by sale
Line BW-1507 in its entirety and a 4,940 foot segment of Line B-55-EXT,
located in Johnson County, Arkansas, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to
access the document. For

assistance, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Lawrence O. Thomas, Director, Rate & Regulatory, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company, P.O. Box 21734, Shreveport, Louisiana 71151, or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER> (telephone) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax),
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or to Mark C. Schroeder, Vice
President & General Counsel, CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission
Company, P.O. Box 1700, Houston, Texas 77210-1700, or by calling (713)
207-3395 (telephone) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax),
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: July 21, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-16165 Filed 7-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 2910]
[DOCID:fr16ja08-47]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8516-3; EPA-HQ-OEI-2007-0977]

Deletion of Risk Management Plan SORN

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of a Deletion of System of Records Notice for the Risk
Management Plan Review Access List.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5
U.S.C. 552a), the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, Office of Emergency Management, is giving
notice that it is deleting the system of records for the Risk
Management Plan Review Access List. The information in this system of
record is neither indexed nor retrieved by a personal identifier.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This notice is effective upon publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorothy McManus,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    The Risk Management Plan Review Access List system of records does
not duplicate any existing system of records. The system contains the
names, title, position, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address,
user ID and password of local, state and federal government officials,
qualified researchers and others who are ``covered persons'' under the
Chemical Safety, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act
(CSISSFRRA) of 1999, and who have requested Risk Management Plan
information under CSISSFRRA. CSISSFRRA, an amendment to the Clean Air
Act, imposes access restrictions to some portions of risk management
plans submitted under the Clean Air Act. Access to the system is
restricted to authorized users and is maintained in a secure, password-
protected computer system, in secure areas and buildings with physical
access controls and environmental controls. The system is maintained by
the Office of Emergency Management in the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response.

    Dated: December 21, 2007.
Molly O'Neill,
Assistant Administrator and Chief Information Officer.
 [FR Doc. E8-659 Filed 1-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70377-70379]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29303]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1229; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-132-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model DC-9-10, DC-9-20, DC-9-30, DC-9-40,
and DC-9-50 series airplanes; and Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-
82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), MD-88, and MD-90-30 airplanes,
that are equipped with auxiliary fuel tanks. This proposed AD was
prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. This
proposed AD would require adding design features to detect electrical
faults, to detect a pump running in an empty fuel tank, and to ensure
that a fuel pump's operation is not affected by certain conditions. We
are proposing this AD to reduce the potential of ignition sources
inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors,
could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the
airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 29,
2011.

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 http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serj Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-
4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-1229;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-132-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review,
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements''
(66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards
for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88,''
Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83).
    Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e.,
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders
to substantiate

that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition sources in the fuel
tanks. This requirement applies to type design holders for large
turbine-powered transport airplanes and for subsequent modifications to
those airplanes. It requires them to perform design reviews and to
develop design changes and maintenance procedures if their designs do
not meet the new fuel tank safety standards. As explained in the
preamble to the rule, we intended to adopt airworthiness directives to
mandate any changes found necessary to address unsafe conditions
identified as a result of these reviews.
    In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation: Single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure
experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for
further action.
    We have determined that the actions identified in this proposed AD
are necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
    A fuel pump may cause an ignition source in a fuel tank when it has
internal electrical faults, or when the pump overheats due to prolonged
dry running in an empty fuel tank. Electrical faults inside fuel pumps
may cause arcing and burn through the pump housing. Electrical arcs
entering an empty fuel tank may cause the fuel vapors to ignite. If a
pump is not shut off in a timely manner when the tank is emptied, the
dry-running pump may cause excessive heat and become an ignition source
inside the tank.

FAA's Findings

    During the SFAR 88 safety assessment, it was determined that each
electrically powered fuel pump installed in the center wing tank and/or
auxiliary fuel tank must have a protective device installed to detect
electrical faults, which can cause arcing and burn-through of the fuel
pump housing. That same device must shut off the pump by automatically
removing electrical power from the pump when such faults are detected.
It was also determined that design features must be added to detect
when a center wing tank or auxiliary tank is emptied such that each
pump is manually or automatically shut off within 60 seconds after it
is emptied. The design features must also preclude undetected running
of a fuel pump in an empty tank, after the pump was commanded off
manually or automatically. The design features must also ensure that a
fuel pump cannot be shut off due to system failures sooner than a
specified length of time.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would prohibit operation of an affected airplane
as of 60 months after the effective date of the AD, unless an amended
type certificate or supplemental type certificate that incorporates the
following design features and requirements has been approved by the
FAA, and those design features are installed on the airplane.
     A protective device for each electrically powered fuel
pump that will detect electrical faults and shut off the pump
automatically when such faults are detected
     Additional design features to detect any center wing tank
or auxiliary fuel tank pump running in an empty fuel tank and to shut
off each pump within a specified time
     Means to ensure that a fuel pump cannot be shut off due to
system failures sooner than a specified length of time.
    This proposed AD would also prohibit operation of any airplane
affected by this AD unless the FAA-approved design features specified
in the certification plans are installed within a specified time.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 1,288 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installing design features--for         50 work-hours x $85 per          $35,000         $39,250     $23,550,000
 airplanes with center wing and          hour = $4,250.
 auxiliary tanks (600 airplanes).
Installing design features--for         35 work-hours x $85 per           17,000          19,975      13,742,800
 airplanes with center wing tank (688    hour = $2,975.
 airplanes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2011-1229; Directorate Identifier
2011-NM-132-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 29, 2011.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company airplanes, certificated in
any category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(8) of
this AD, and equipped with auxiliary fuel tanks.
    (1) Model DC-9-11, DC-9-12, DC-9-13, DC-9-14, DC-9-15, and DC-9-
15F airplanes.
    (2) Model DC-9-21 airplanes.
    (3) Model DC-9-31, DC-9-32, DC-9-32 (VC-9C), DC-9-32F, DC-9-33F,
DC-9-34, DC-9-34F, and DC-9-32F (C-9A, C-9B) airplanes.
    (4) Model DC-9-41 airplanes.
    (5) Model DC-9-51 airplanes.
    (6) Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and
DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes.
    (7) Model MD-88 airplanes.
    (8) Model MD-90-30 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to reduce the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Criteria for Operation

    As of 60 months after the effective date of this AD, no person
may operate any airplane affected by this AD unless an amended type
certificate or supplemental type certificate that incorporates the
design features and requirements described in paragraphs (g)(1),
(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD has been approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, and those design
features are installed on the airplane.
    (1) Each electrically powered fuel pump installed in the center
wing tank or auxiliary fuel tank must have a protective device
installed to detect electrical faults that can cause arcing and burn
through the fuel pump housing. The same device must shut off the
pump by automatically removing electrical power from the pump when
such faults are detected. When a fuel pump is shut off as the result
of detection of an electrical fault, the device must stay latched
off until the fault is cleared through maintenance action and
verified that the pump and the electrical power feed is safe for
operation.
    (2) Additional design features must be installed to detect when
any center wing tank or auxiliary fuel tank pump is running in an
empty fuel tank. The prospective pump shutoff system must shut off
each pump no later than 60 seconds after the fuel tank is emptied.
The pump shutoff system design must preclude undetected running of a
fuel pump in an empty tank, after the pump was commanded off
manually or automatically.
    (3) The implementation of the design features defined in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD must ensure that a fuel pump
cannot be shut off due to system failures including nuisance
shutoffs sooner than 100,000 hours' mean time between failures
(MTBF).
    Note 1: After accomplishing the installation specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, maintenance and/or preventative
maintenance under 14 CFR part 43 is permitted provided the
maintenance does not result in changing the AD-mandated
configuration (reference 14 CFR 39.7).

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person
identified in the Related Information section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Serj Harutunian,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles
ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 28, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-29303 Filed 11-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P