[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 193 (Monday, October 6, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60078-60081]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23623]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0735; FRL-9917-23-Region 9]

Approval of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes; Las Vegas Valley, Nevada; Redesignation to
Attainment for PM10

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a revision to the Nevada state implementation plan
that provides for the maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standard for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than
or equal to a nominal ten micrometers (PM10) in Las Vegas
Valley for the next ten years and to approve the related motor vehicle
emissions budgets. Based in part on the approval of the PM10
maintenance plan, EPA is also taking final action to grant the State of
Nevada's request for redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to attainment
for the PM10 standard. Consistent with the assumptions of
the maintenance plan, EPA is approving revisions to certain local
fugitive dust rules to ensure their continued applicability after
redesignation of the area to attainment. Lastly, EPA is taking final
action to delete the area designation for Las Vegas Valley for the
revoked national standard for total suspended particulate because the
designation is no longer necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 5, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0735. Generally, documents in the docket for
this action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in
hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at
the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and
some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g.,
confidential business information or ``CBI''). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karina O'Connor, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (775) 434-
8176<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is
arranged as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Actions
II. Public Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Actions

    On July 21, 2014 (79 FR 42258), under Clean Air Act (CAA or
``Act'') section 110(k)(3), EPA proposed to approve a submittal from
the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated September
7, 2012 of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for
Particulate Matter (PM10), Clark County, Nevada (August 2012) (``Las
Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan'') as a revision to the
Nevada state implementation plan (SIP). In so doing, we found that the
Las Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan adequately
demonstrates that the area will maintain the PM10 national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or ``standard'') for 10 years
beyond redesignation and includes sufficient contingency provisions to
promptly correct any violation of the PM10 standard which
occurs after redesignation and thereby meets the requirements for
maintenance plans under CAA section 175A. We also proposed to approve
the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) in the Las Vegas Valley
PM10 Maintenance Plan because we found they meet the
applicable transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR
93.118(e).
    In our July 21, 2014 proposed rule, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D),
we proposed to grant NDEP's request to redesignate the Las Vegas Valley
PM10 nonattainment area from ``nonattainment'' to
``attainment'' for the PM10 standard. We proposed to do so
based on our conclusion that the Las Vegas Valley has attained the
PM10 standard; \1\ that the relevant portions of the Nevada
SIP are fully approved; that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions; that the State of
Nevada has met all of the requirements applicable to the Las Vegas
Valley PM10 nonattainment area with respect to section 110
and part D of the CAA; and, based on our proposed approval as described
above, that the Las Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan meets
the requirements for maintenance plans under section 175A of the CAA;
and that, therefore, the State of Nevada has met the criteria for
redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the Las Vegas Valley
PM10 nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In our proposed approval, EPA stated that ``SLAMS data for
2014 are not yet available . . . but will be reviewed prior to final
action to ensure that they are consistent with continued
attainment.'' 79 FR at 42263. We have now reviewed 2014 data,
submitted to AQS as of September 12, 2014, and have found it to be
consistent with continued attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, we proposed to approve certain fugitive dust rules (i.e.,
Clark County Air Quality Regulations sections 41, and 90 through 93)
that Clark County has amended to ensure their continued applicability
after the area is redesignated to attainment and that NDEP submitted to
us (on May 27, 2014) as a revision to the Nevada SIP.
    Lastly, we proposed to delete the area designation for Las Vegas
Valley for the revoked NAAQS for total suspended particulate.
    Please see our July 21, 2014 proposed rule for a detailed
discussion of the background for these actions, and the rationale for
approval of the Las Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan, for
granting NDEP's request for redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to
attainment, for approving Clark County's amended fugitive dust rules,
and for deleting the TSP designation for Las Vegas Valley.

II. Public Comments

    Our July 21, 2014 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment
period, which closed on August 20, 2014. We received no comments on our
proposal during this period.

III. Final Action

    Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for the reasons set forth in our
July 21, 2014 proposed rule, EPA is taking final action to approve
NDEP's submittal dated September 7, 2012 of the Redesignation Request
and Maintenance Plan for Particulate Matter (PM10), Clark County,
Nevada (August 2012) (``Las Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance
Plan'') as a revision to the Nevada SIP. EPA finds that the maintenance
demonstration showing how the area will continue to attain the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS for 10 years beyond redesignation, and the
contingency provisions describing the actions that Clark County will
take in the event of a future monitored violation, meet all applicable
requirements for maintenance plans and related contingency provisions
in CAA section 175A. EPA is also finding adequate and approving the
motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Las Vegas Valley PM10
Maintenance Plan

(i.e., 141.14 tons per day in 2008, 2015, and 2023) because we find
they meet the applicable transportation conformity requirements under
40 CFR 93.118(e).
    Second, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), we are taking final action
to grant NDEP's request, which accompanied the submittal of the
maintenance plan, to redesignate the Las Vegas Valley PM10
nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
We are doing so based on our conclusion that the area has met the five
criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). Our
conclusion in this regard is in turn based on our determination that
the area has attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, that relevant
portions of the Nevada SIP are fully approved, that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in
emissions, that Nevada has met all requirements applicable to the Las
Vegas Valley PM10 nonattainment area with respect to section
110 and part D of the CAA, and based on our approval as part of this
action of the Las Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan. Our
determination that the area has attained the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS is based in part on our concurrence with Clark County DAQ that
the exceedances monitored in Las Vegas Valley on July 3, 2011 were
caused by a high wind exceptional event and our related exclusion of
the exceedances from the attainment determination.
    Third, EPA is taking final action to approve revisions to Clark
County fugitive dust rules sections 41, and 90 through 93 that were
submitted on May 27, 2014 as a revision to the Nevada SIP because we
find that they ensure continued implementation of the rules after
redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to attainment and because they meet
all other applicable requirements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Approval of Clark County amended sections 41, and 90 through
93 will supersede the following existing rules in the applicable
Nevada SIP: Section 41 as approved at 46 FR 43141 (August 27, 1981);
section 90 as approved at 71 FR 63250 (October 30, 2006); section 91
as approved at 69 FR 32272 (June 9, 2004); section 92 as approved at
71 FR 63250 (October 30, 2006); and section 93 as approved at 71 FR
63250 (October 30, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, EPA is taking final action to delete the area designation
for Las Vegas Valley for the revoked national standard for total
suspended particulate because the designation is no longer necessary.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by State law. Redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the
Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these actions merely approve a State plan
and redesignation request as meeting Federal requirements and do not
impose additional requirements beyond those by State law. For these
reasons, these actions:
     Are not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and Executive Order 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. Nonetheless, EPA has
discussed the action with the one Tribe, the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe,
located within the Las Vegas Valley PM10 nonattainment area.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: September 17, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart DD--Nevada

0
2. Section 52.1470 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (c), Table 3, by revising the entries for ``Section 41:
Subsections 41.1-41.4,'' ``Section 90,'' ``Section 91,'' ``Section
92,'' and ``Section 93''; and
0
b. By adding in paragraph (e), under the table heading ``Air Quality
Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada'' an entry for
``Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for Particulate Matter
(PM10), Clark County, Nevada (August 2012)'' after the entry
for ``Pages 4-125 and 4-126 and appendix R (of the PM-10 State
Implementation Plan for Clark County).''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.1470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                 Table 3--EPA-Approved Clark County Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            County                               Additional
        County citation              Title/Subject      effective date  EPA Approval date       explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 41....................  Fugitive Dust.........         4/29/14  [Insert Federal    Adopted by Clark
                                                                         Register           County on April 15,
                                                                         citation], 10/6/   2014 and submitted
                                                                         14.                by NDEP on May 27,
                                                                                2014.

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 90....................  Fugitive Dust from             4/29/14  [Insert Federal    Adopted by Clark
                                 Open Areas and Vacant                   Register           County on April 15,
                                 Lots.                                   citation], 10/6/   2014 and submitted
                                                                         14.                by NDEP on May 27,
                                                                                2014.
Section 91....................  Fugitive Dust from             4/29/14  [Insert Federal    Adopted by Clark
                                 Unpaved Roads,                          Register           County on April 15,
                                 Unpaved Alleys, and                     citation], 10/6/   2014 and submitted
                                 Unpaved Easement                        14.                by NDEP on May 27,
                                 Roads.                                                     2014.
Section 92....................  Fugitive Dust from             4/29/14  [Insert Federal    Adopted by Clark
                                 Unpaved Parking Lots,                   Register           County on April 15,
                                 Material Handling &                     citation], 10/6/   2014 and submitted
                                 Storage Yards, &                        14.                by NDEP on May 27,
                                 Vehicle & Equipment                                        2014.
                                 Storage Yards.
Section 93....................  Fugitive Dust from             4/29/14  [Insert Federal    Adopted by Clark
                                 Paved Roads & Street                    Register           County on April 15,
                                 Sweeping Equipment.                     citation], 10/6/   2014 and submitted
                                                                         14.                by NDEP on May 27,
                                                                                2014.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                   EPA-Approved Nevada Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Applicable
     Name of SIP provision          geographic or    State submittal   EPA Approval date        Explanation
                                 nonattainment area        date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Redesignation Request and        Las Vegas Valley,           9/7/12   [Insert Federal     Excludes appendix B
 Maintenance Plan for             Clark County.                        Register            (``Documentation of
 Particulate Matter (PM10),                                            citation], 10/6/    the Public Review
 Clark County, Nevada (August                                          14.                 Process'').
 2012).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * * * * * * *
\1\ The organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada's original
  1972 SIP, which was divided into 12 sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans,
  are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small Business Stationary Source Technical and
  Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or quasi-
  regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR
  52.1470(c).

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
4. Section 81.329 is amended by:
0
a. Removing in the table under ``Nevada--TSP,'' the entry for ``Las
Vegas Valley (212) (15-24S, 56-64E)''; and
0
b. Revising in the table under ``Nevada--PM-10,'' the entry for ``Clark
County'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.329  Nevada.

* * * * *

                                                                      Nevada--PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Designation                                            Classification
            Designated area             ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Date                           Type                      Date                     Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Clark County:
    Las Vegas planning area............  November 5, 2014...................  Attainment..............  .......................  .......................
    Hydrographic area 212..............  ...................................  ........................  .......................  .......................

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-23623 Filed 10-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 77214-77215]
[DOCID:fr29de05-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53007; File No. SR-ISE-2005-48]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
Inc.; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendments
Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto Relating to Market Maker Quote Interaction

December 22, 2005.

I. Introduction

    On October 3, 2005, the International Securities Exchange, Inc.
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend ISE Rule 804(d)
regarding a delay of up to one second before two market maker
quotations interact. On October 21, 2005, the ISE submitted Amendment
No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ On November 3, 2005, the ISE
submitted Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change.\4\ The proposed
rule change and Amendments No. 1 and 2 were published for comment in
the Federal Register on November 10, 2005.\5\ The Commission received
no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule
change, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Form 19b-4 dated October 21, 2005, which replaced the
original filing in its entirety (``Amendment No. 1'').
    \4\ See partial amendment dated November 3, 2005, which
corrected a minor omission in the current rule text and a
typographical error in the filing (``Amendment No. 2'').
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52729 (November 3,
2005), 70 FR 68485 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    Currently, ISE Rule 804(d) provides for a one-second delay before
the quotations of ISE market makers

interact.\6\ As noted in SR-ISE-2004-24, the ISE treats orders and
quotations differently, with ISE Rule 804(a) stating that only market
makers may enter quotations on the ISE. Market makers use quotations to
input and update prices on multiple series of options at the same time.
Quotations generally are based on pricing models that rely on various
factors, including the price and volatility of the underlying security.
The ISE stated that as these variables change, a market maker's pricing
model automatically updates quotations for some or all of an option's
series. In contrast, an order is an interest to buy a stated number of
contracts of one specific options series. The ISE noted that all ISE
members, including ISE market makers, can enter orders.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49931 (June 28,
2004), 69 FR 40696 (July 6, 2004) (``SR-ISE-2004-24'').
    \7\ ISE Rule 717 imposes various limitations on orders that
Electronic Access Members may enter on the ISE, while ISE Rule 805
governs market maker orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the ISE, the purpose of the one-second delay was to
allow a market maker to update its quotations to reflect price changes
in an underlying stock before another market maker's quotation could
``hit'' the updating market maker's quotation. In SR-ISE-2004-24, the
ISE represented that it promptly processes quotation updates when it
receives them, but that there is invariably a lag between the time the
underlying stock price first changes and the time by which the ISE can
process all the corresponding quotation changes. In SR-ISE-2004-24, the
ISE also stated its belief that the one-second delay would allow the
ISE the time to process quotation updates, without effecting multiple
executions during the update process. In the Notice, the ISE noted,
however, that the one-second delay may no longer be necessary as the
ISE trading system and its market maker members' quoting systems
continue to advance technologically. Accordingly, the ISE proposes an
amendment to ISE Rule 804(d) to give the ISE the flexibility to remove
the one-second delay. In making a determination to remove the one-
second delay, the ISE stated that it would take into consideration
input from its market maker members, particularly through the ISE's
Market Maker Advisory Committee. The ISE also noted that any change
made to the one-second delay would be implemented on a uniform, market-
wide basis (as opposed to, for example, a class-by-class basis).
Further, the ISE stated that it would inform its members of any changes
made to the one-second delay by distributing a Regulatory Information
Circular prior to the implementation of any such change.

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange \8\ and, in
particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act \9\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder. Specifically, the Commission finds
that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in
that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In SR-ISE-2004-24, the Commission noted the ISE's belief that,
without the proposed one-second ``timer'' function, pricing
inefficiencies would result on the Exchange, and ISE market makers
would widen their quotations or limit size to avoid multiple executions
against other market makers.\11\ To the extent the ISE trading system
and its market maker members' quoting systems continue to advance
technologically to reduce the likelihood of market maker quotes
interacting, the one-second delay may no longer be necessary.
Accordingly, the Commission believes that granting the ISE the
flexibility to remove the one-second delay in such circumstance is
consistent with the Act. Additionally, the Commission believes that
permitting the ISE to determine to reinstate the one-second delay also
is consistent with the Act, if the reinstatement of the delay is
necessary to avoid the interaction of market maker quotations. In
determining whether to remove the one-second delay, the Commission
understands that the ISE would consult with its market maker members,
particularly through the Exchange's Market Maker Advisory Committee.
Regardless of whether the ISE makes any changes to the one-second
delay, the Commission notes that ISE market makers would be required to
be firm for their quotations for the same size to customers and broker-
dealer orders, including orders for the account of other ISE market
makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In connection with the approval of SR-ISE-2004-24, the
Commission granted ISE's request for a limited exemption from Rule
602 of Regulation NMS under the Act (``Quote Rule''). Specifically,
the Commission granted ISE market makers an exemption from their
obligations under paragraph (c)(2) of the Quote Rule with respect to
trades with matching ISE market maker quotations for no more than
one second, provided that the quotations are locked or crossed for
no more than one second, and that such ISE market maker is firm to
all other customer and broker-dealer orders, including orders for
the accounts of other ISE market makers. See letter from Robert
Colby, Deputy Director, Division of Market Regulation, Commission,
to Michael Simon, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, ISE,
dated June 24, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\12\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2005-48), as amended, is
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-8071 Filed 12-28-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: December 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 241)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 66930-66932]
[DOCID:fr17de09-10]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1176; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-062-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model G58
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model G58 airplanes. This
proposed AD would require inspecting the installation of stand-off
hardware between the heater fuel line and the heater over-temperature
sensor wires for minimum clearance and installing acceptable stand-off
hardware if stand-off hardware is missing or inadequate. This proposed
AD would also require inspecting the brake reservoir line and the fuel
heater power wire for damage and minimum clearance, replacing any
damaged wires and/or lines, and installing stand-off hardware if
minimum clearance is not met. This proposed AD results from reports
received of a power wire shorting out on the brake reservoir tube. We
are proposing this AD to detect and correct inadequate clearance of the
brake reservoir tubing and the heater fuel pump wiring, which could
result in chafing and shorting out of the electrical wiring and chafing
of the tubing carrying flammable fluids. This condition could lead to a
fire in the nose wheel well.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 1,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085;
telephone: 1<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Internet: http://hawkerbeechcraft.com.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Schwemmer, Aerospace Engineer,
1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316)
946-4174; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number, ``FAA-
2009-1176; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-062-AD'' at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend the proposed AD in light 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 concerning this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports that on a Hawker Beechcraft Corporation
Model G58 airplane a power wire shorted out on the brake reservoir
tube, resulting in a fire in the nose wheel well. The 0.50-inch minimum
clearance requirements may not have been met between the brake
reservoir tube and the combustion heater fuel pump power wire below the
left side of the nose baggage compartment.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in chafing and
shorting out of the electrical wiring and chafing of the tubing
carrying flammable fluids, which could lead to a fire in the nose wheel
well.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB
32-3898, dated November 2008.
    The service information describes procedures for:

     Inspecting the installation of stand-off hardware between
the heater fuel line and the heater over-temperature sensor wires for
minimum clearance;
     Installing acceptable stand-off hardware if stand-off
hardware is missing or inadequate;
     Inspecting the brake reservoir line and the fuel heater
power wire for damage and minimum clearance;
     Replacing any damaged wires and/or lines; and
     Installing stand-off hardware between the brake reservoir
line and the fuel heater power wire if minimum clearance is not met.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and
determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist
or develop on other products of the same type design. This proposed AD
would require inspecting the installation of stand-off hardware between
the heater fuel line and the heater over-temperature sensor wires for
minimum clearance and installing acceptable stand-off hardware if
stand-off hardware is missing or inadequate. This proposed AD would
also require inspecting the brake reservoir line and the fuel heater
power wire for damage and minimum clearance, replacing any damaged
wires and/or lines, and installing stand-off hardware if minimum
clearance is not met.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 71 airplanes in the
U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to do the proposed inspection of
the heater fuel line, the heater over-temperature sensor wires, the
brake reservoir line, and the fuel heater power wire:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost per   Total cost on
                  Labor cost                               Parts cost                airplane     U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $80 per hour = $80..............  Not applicable..................             $80          $5,680
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary stand-off
hardware installation that would be required based on the results of
the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of
airplanes that may need this installation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
               Labor cost                   Parts cost       airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.5 work-hour x $80 per hour = $40.......             $50             $90
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement of
the brake line that would be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of
airplanes that may need this installation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
               Labor cost                   Parts cost       airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 work-hours x $80 per hour = $480......            $100            $580
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hawker Beechcraft Corporation will allow warranty credit as
specified in Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 32-3898,
dated November 2008.

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 have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:

    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket that contains the proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information 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 Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>)
is located at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

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 AD:

Hawker Beechcraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2009-1176; Directorate
Identifier 2009-CE-062-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by February 1, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model G58 airplanes, serial numbers TH-
2125 through TH-2172 and TH-2174 through TH-2220, that are
certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports received of a power wire
shorting out on the brake reservoir tube. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct inadequate clearance of the brake reservoir
tubing and the heater fuel pump wiring, which could result in
chafing and shorting out of the electrical wiring and chafing of the
tubing carrying flammable fluids. This condition could lead to a
fire in the nose wheel well.

Compliance

    (f) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Actions                 Compliance            Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Inspect the installation  Within the next 50    Follow Hawker
 of the stand-off hardware     hours time-in-        Beechcraft
 between the heater fuel       service (TIS) after   Mandatory Service
 line and heater over-         the effective date    Bulletin SB 32-
 temperature sensor wires      of this AD or         3898, dated
 for minimum clearance.        within the next 12    November 2008.
                               months after the
                               effective date of
                               this AD, whichever
                               occurs first.
(2) If, during the            Before further        Follow Hawker
 inspection required in        flight after the      Beechcraft
 paragraph (f)(1) of this      inspection where      Mandatory Service
 AD, the stand-off hardware    the missing stand-    Bulletin SB 32-
 is not installed or it does   off hardware and/or   3898, dated
 not maintain the minimum      inadequate            November 2008.
 clearance, install stand-     clearance was found.
 off hardware as specified
 in the service information.
(3) Inspect the brake         Within the next 50    Follow Hawker
 reservoir line and the fuel   hours TIS after the   Beechcraft
 heater power wire for         effective date of     Mandatory Service
 damage.                       this AD or within     Bulletin SB 32-
                               the next 12 months    3898, dated
                               after the effective   November 2008.
                               date of this AD,
                               whichever occurs
                               first.
(4) If, during the            Before further        Follow Hawker
 inspection required in        flight after the      Beechcraft
 paragraph (f)(3) of this      inspection where      Mandatory Service
 AD, damage is found, repair   damaged tubing and/   Bulletin SB 32-
 or replace damaged tubing     or wiring was found.  3898, dated
 and/or wiring found.                                November 2008.
(5) Inspect the installation  Within the next 50    Follow Hawker
 of the stand-off hardware     hours TIS after the   Beechcraft
 between the brake reservoir   effective date of     Mandatory Service
 line and the fuel heater      this AD or within     Bulletin SB 32-
 power wire for minimum        the next 12 months    3898, dated
 clearance.                    after the effective   November 2008.
                               date of this AD,
                               whichever occurs
                               first.
(6) If, during the            Before further        Follow Hawker
 inspection required in        flight after the      Beechcraft
 paragraph (f)(5) of this      inspection where      Mandatory Service
 AD, the stand-off hardware    the missing stand-    Bulletin SB 32-
 is not installed or it does   off hardware and/or   3898, dated
 not maintain the minimum      inadequate            November 2008.
 clearance, install stand-     clearance was found.
 off hardware as specified
 in the service information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Kevin Schwemmer, Aerospace Engineer, 1801 Airport Road, Room
100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (316)
946-4107. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which
the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI)
in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.

Related Information

    (h) To get copies of the service information referenced in this
AD, contact Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, P.O. Box 85, Wichita,
Kansas 67201-0085; telephone: 1<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://hawkerbeechcraft.com. To view
the AD docket, go to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on December 8, 2009.
Margaret Kline,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-29984 Filed 12-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P