           SPF Containment and Ventilation Meeting Objectives/Agenda
                            NIOSH Cincinnati, Ohio
                                  May 6, 2010

8:00 AM 	Welcome (NIOSH)  5-min.
8:05 AM	Introductions 5-min.
            8:10 AM	Overview, Current Practices, and Guidance for SPF Operations (INDUSTRY) 2-hours

            1. Variability of Spray Polyurethane (SPF) Workspaces (INDUSTRY: Jim Andersen, BASF; Bob Duke, Carolina Comfort Foam) and Guidance for Feasible Engineering Controls (Ventilation) -1 hour and 25 min.
               (Note: for each item, discuss variability and how that impacts ventilation approaches, describe current and typical industry practices, and present current and planned guidance. Include time for group discussion on guidance)
                  a. indoor vs. outdoor operations
                  b. new construction vs. retrofits
                  c. commercial vs. residential
                  d. different foams - 2KHP ((1/2)-lb, 2-lb, 3-lb, open-cell, closed-cell)
                  e. DIY  -  2KLP
                  f. OCF
            2. Safety (INDUSTRY)  -  15 min.
            3. Comparison SPF Application vs. Truck Bed Liner Application (INDUSTRY-Bill Robert, BASF) 20-min.
                  a. Equipment
                  b. Properties
                  c. Physical Conditions
10:10 AM	Break  -  10 min.
10:20 AM	NIOSH/DART/EPHB Engineering Control Interventions (Scott Earnest, NIOSH) 10-min.
10:30 AM	NIOSH/DART/EPHB Ventilation Laboratory, 1-hour
11:30 AM	 Working Lunch
12:30 PM	Discussion/Summary of Existing Air Monitoring Data (INDUSTRY: Brian Karlovich, Bayer Material Science) 1 hour 30 min.
2:00 PM	Update - existing SPF OSHA data/activities (Janet Carter, OSHA) 10 min.
2:10 PM	Brief Discussion  -  SPF control strategies (Dan Almaguer, NIOSH)  5 min.
            1. Handout  -  OSHA Respiratory Protection Assigned Protection Factors table
            2. Rationale - need for both PPE including respirators and ventilation
            3. Ventilation  -  Concentration Reduction
Break 2:15	10-min.
2:25 PM	Regulations and Standards 40-minutes
            1. Responsibilities under the OSHAct (Janet Carter, OSHA) 10-min.
            2. EPA guidance on exhausting to the outside during and after SPF application  -  regulations and requirements. (Bradley Grams, EPA Region V) 10-min.
            3. Building Standards for Ventilation. (Laureen Burton, EPA) 10-min.
            4. Disposal issues (Bradley Grams) 10-min.
3:05 PM	VENTILATION PRINCIPLES and DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (GARCIA/SIKORA) 1-hour 15
            1. Building a negative pressure containment - 15 min.
            2. Air Supply (active  - two fan vs. passive-single fan) and exhaust - 50 min.
            a.  Location (Kevin Sikora, ERG)
               b.  Fans  -  Air flow rates/Air exchange rates (for contaminant reduction  -  these rates are dependent on the volume of material sprayed) (Alberto Garcia, NIOSH)
            c.  Filtration  -  Efficiency MERV
         		- for contaminant removal from exhaust stream
         		- to protect equipment
            3. Dust Control Issues (Jennifer Topmiller, NIOSH) 10 min.
               Trimming  -  potential adaptation of NIOSH wood dust controls to SPF trimmers

4:20 PM		Wrap-up - Discussion of future research and data collection needs.
           a.  2KHP Systems, DIY or 2KLP Systems, OCF
           b. Panel System
           c. Two fan system
           d. Single fan system
           e. Filtration

List of Attendees:
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT:

Daniel Almaguer, MS
Industrial Hygienist
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Division of Applied Research and Technology
Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS R-5
Cincinnati, OH 45226
513/841-4232
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
G. Scott Earnest, Ph.D., P.E., C.S.P.
CAPT, USPHS
Branch Chief
Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch
Division of Applied Research and Technology
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Ph:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Alberto Garcia
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Division of Applied Research and Technology
Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS R-5
Cincinnati, OH 45226
513/841-4596
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
David Marlow
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Division of Applied Research and Technology
Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS R-5
Cincinnati, OH 45226
513/841-4204
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Kenneth R. Mead, PhD, PE
CAPT, U.S. Public Health Service
Senior Research Engineer
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Jennifer L. Topmiller
Team Leader
Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS R-5
Cincinnati, Ohio 45226
513-841-4292

Anjali Lamba, MPH, CIH
USEPA
Chemical Engineering Branch
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
202-564-0996
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kevin Sikora  -  EPA Contractor/Consultant
ERG
14555 Avion Parkway, Ste. 200
Chantilly, VA  20151-1102
703-633-1707
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Bradley Grams  -  EPA Region 5
Environmental Scientist, OCSPP
Sublead Region Coordinator Reviewing and Reducing TSCA Risk
Land and Chemicals Division
Chemicals Management Branch, Toxics Section
Chicago, IL  60604
312-886-7747
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Janet Carter - OSHA
Health Scientist
OSHA - Directorate of Standards and Guidance
200 Constitution Ave. NW - Room N3718
Washington, DC 20210
202-693-2282
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SPF INDUSTRY:
Theresa Lucado
American Chemistry Council  -  Center for the Polyurethanes Industry<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Jim Andersen
BASF Corporation<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Laughton Cockrell
RPC Industries, Incorporated<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Rand Duhe
Huntsman Polurethanes<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Robert Duke
Carolina Comfort Foam & Applied Energy Savings Systems<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Rick Duncan (via conf call)
Spray Polyurethane Foam Alliance (SPFA<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Brian Karlovich
Bayer MaterialScience, LLC<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
William Robert
BASF Corporation<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Clarence Tolbert
NCFI Polyurethanes<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 121 (Tuesday, June 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35684-35687]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14631]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0342]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Schuylkill River; Philadelphia, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary Interim Rule and Request for Comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
waters of the Schuylkill River around the Point Breeze docks of
Philadelphia Energy Solutions for a period of six months, from July 5,
2014 to January 5, 2015. The safety zone is necessary when a barge with
a beam (width) up to 80 feet moors at the Philadelphia Energy Solutions
Point Breeze docks Deloach pier, reducing the horizontal clearance of
the channel by as much as 30 feet when a barge is moored at the
facility. This rule will allow the Coast Guard to restrict all vessel
traffic through the safety zone when a barge having a beam of 65 to 80
feet is scheduled to moor at the facility. The Coast Guard is seeking
comments on the potential impact to vessel traffic on the Schuylkill
River that may result from 30 feet of reduced horizontal channel
clearance when a barge is moored at the Point Breeze docks of
Philadelphia Energy Solutions in the Schuylkill River. The Coast Guard
intends to finalize this interim rule after considering, and
incorporating to the extent appropriate, any comments from the public.

DATES: This rule is effective from July 5, 2014 to January 5, 2015.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or
before July 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email First Class Petty Officer Tom Simkins, Sector Delaware
Bay Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (215)
271-4889, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0342] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0342) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one during the comment period, using one of the methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public
meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the

Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule. It would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay promulgating
this rule, as it is necessary to protect the safety of waterway users
operating in the vicinity of the safety zone. Mooring operations at the
Deloach pier for barges with a beam (width) up to 80 feet are scheduled
to begin in July 2014, and rapid establishment of the safety zone is
needed to mitigate the potential safety hazards associated with these
operations. A delay or cancellation of mooring operations in order to
accommodate a full notice and comment period would delay necessary
operations and result in increased costs and risks. This rule will
enable Philadelphia Energy Solutions to reduce the costs and risks
associated with multiple oil transfers. The Coast Guard believes it
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay
this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register for the same reasons.
    The Coast Guard will provide as much advance notice as possible
prior to enforcement. Specific closure dates and times will be
disseminated via a Safety Marine Information Broadcast during each
closure and posted in the Local Notice to Mariners, if possible.
    The Coast Guard is soliciting public comments on this temporary
interim rule. Although this interim rule is effective on July 5, 2014,
we will consider public comments when developing a final rule that will
supersede this interim rule, and we may make changes in response to
public comments on any part of this interim rule.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is: 33 U.S.C 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter
701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6,
160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of waterway
users from hazards that may result from 30 feet of reduced horizontal
channel clearance when a barge with a beam (width) up to 80 feet is
moored at the Point Breeze docks of Philadelphia Energy Solutions in
the Schuylkill River.

D. Discussion of Temporary Interim Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
waters of the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, PA around the Deloach
Pier, to be in effect while barges are moored which have a beam between
65 and 80 feet. Due to the width of these barges and the close
proximity of the dock to the navigable channel, vessel traffic will be
restricted from utilizing the full width of the channel while these
barges are moored there. This temporary safety zone will be established
for a period of six months, from July 5, 2014 to January 5, 2015.
During times of enforcement, no person may enter the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or her representative. Once this
rule becomes effective, the Coast Guard will evaluate the continued
need for the safety zone.
    Philadelphia Energy Solutions utilizes two ``Point Breeze docks,''
called the ``Short pier'' and the ``Deloach pier,'' to conduct oil
transfers on the Schuylkill River. The proximity of the navigable
channel to the Short pier is as little as 65 feet on the south end.
Likewise, the Deloach pier is only 50 feet from the boundaries of the
navigable channel at its southernmost point. Due to close proximity to
the navigable channel and the resulting beam restrictions on moored
barges, Philadelphia Energy Solutions presently contracts a smaller
barge to lighter product from the larger barge at anchorage in the
Delaware River. The smaller barge then conducts transfers at the Point
Breeze docks. To reduce the risk of multiple oil transfers,
Philadelphia Energy Solutions has requested to moor barges having a
beam of up to 80 feet at the Point Breeze docks Deloach pier.
    Philadelphia Energy Solutions requested permission to moor barges
having a beam of up to 80 feet at their Point Breeze docks Deloach pier
for the purpose of preventing dock congestion at Girard Point, thereby
reducing the presence of barges at anchor awaiting berth in the
Delaware River and reducing the risk of unnecessary oil transfers. The
channel within the Schuylkill River is 300 feet wide at the location of
the Point Breeze docks. A barge having a beam of 80 feet will overlap
the navigable channel by approximately 30 feet while moored at the
Deloach pier of the Point Breeze docks.
    The Coast Guard has evaluated the potential impact to commercial
navigation on the Schuylkill River and has discussed this action with
maritime stakeholders on multiple occasions through the Mariner's
Advisory Committee for the Bay and River Delaware. The Mariners
Advisory Committee has received no stakeholder objections. Currently,
only one berth regularly operates upriver of Passyunk Avenue Bridge,
receiving barges which will not be restricted by the reduced horizontal
channel clearance at Philadelphia Energy Solutions. Other terminals
upriver of the bridge no longer receive vessel traffic.
    No objections have been received by commercial stakeholders making
use of the channel. Additionally, it is not anticipated that larger
vessel traffic will be established upriver of Point Breeze due to
existing bridge height restrictions. This rule is only in effect for
six months and subject to review in the event larger vessel traffic
wishes to trade upriver of Point Breeze in the future.
    This rule is required in order to safely facilitate cargo
operations and protect both life and property on the navigable
waterways of the Schuylkill River in respect to the commercial/
recreational vessel traffic, while mitigating congestion and anchorage
use in nearby navigable waters. The Coast Guard is establishing a
safety zone on the Schuylkill River at the Point Breeze docks of
Philadelphia Energy Solutions from the Passyunk Avenue Bridge to
latitude 39[deg]54'50'' N to facilitate the movement of barge traffic
in the Schuylkill River and to prevent conflict of navigation between
vessels transiting the Schuylkill River and barges mooring at the
Deloach pier of Philadelphia Energy Solutions. The safety zone will
provide notice for the safety of vessel traffic in the navigable
channel. When a barge having a beam (width) of 65 to 80 feet is
scheduled to moor at the Deloach pier, Philadelphia Energy Solutions
will give the Coast Guard 24 hours advance notice. The Coast Guard will
permit the wide barge to moor and will broadcast the implementation of
the safety zone for the duration of the time that the barge is moored
at the Deloach pier. Advance public notifications will be made to the
local maritime community through the Broadcast Notice to Mariners and
Local Notice to Mariners, if possible.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule is not a
significant regulatory action because it will not interfere with
existing or potential activity on the Schuylkill River.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
navigable channel is 300 feet wide, providing a remaining 270 feet of
horizontal channel clearance for the passage of vessel traffic in the
Schuylkill River. Additionally, the only commercial vessel traffic
utilizing the waterway upriver of the Passyunk Avenue Bridge is an
occasional barge. All anticipated vessel traffic will be able to pass
safely around an 80 foot wide barge moored at the Deloach pier of the
Point Breeze docks at Philadelphia Energy Solutions. Before the safety
zone goes into effect, maritime advisories will be made widely
available to users of the Schuylkill River navigable channel.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule would not result
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule would not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule involves implementation of a
safety zone when a barge having beam (width) of 65 to 80 feet is moored
at the Deloach pier of the Point Breeze docks at Philadelphia Energy
Solutions on the Schuylkill River. This rule is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination
are available in the docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-
295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T05-0342, to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0342  Safety Zone, Schuylkill River; Philadelphia, PA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, PA, inside a boundary described
as originating from the Passyunk Avenue Bridge south to latitude
39[deg]54'50'' N.
    (b) Enforcement period. (1) This regulation is enforced during
times when a barge having a beam (width) of 65 to 80 feet is moored at
the Deloach pier of the Point Breeze docks at Philadelphia Energy
Solutions.
    (2) Prior to commencing enforcement of this Safety Zone, the COTP
or designated on-scene patrol personnel will notify the public whenever
the regulations are being enforced, to include dates and times. The
means of notification may include, but are not limited to, Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, Marine Safety Information
Bulletins, or other appropriate means.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the
general regulations governing safety zones in 33 CFR 165.23.
    (2) All persons and vessels transiting through the Safety Zone must
be authorized by the Captain of the Port or her representative.
    (3) All persons or vessels wishing to transit through the Safety
Zone must request authorization to do so from the Captain of the Port
or her representative 30 minutes prior to the intended time of transit.
    (4) Vessels granted permission to transit must do so in accordance
with the directions provided by the Captain of the Port or her
representative to the vessel.
    (5) To seek permission to transit the Safety Zone, the Captain of
the Port or her representative can be contacted via Sector Delaware Bay
Command Center<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (6) This section applies to all vessels wishing to transit through
the Safety Zone except vessels that are engaged in the following
operations:
    (i) Enforcing laws;
    (ii) Servicing aids to navigation; and
    (iii) Emergency response vessels.
    (7) No person or vessel may enter or remain in a safety zone
without the permission of the Captain of the Port;
    (8) Each person and vessel in a safety zone shall obey any
direction or order of the Captain of the Port;
    (9) No person may board, or take or place any article or thing on
board, any vessel in a safety zone without the permission of the
Captain of the Port; and
    (10) No person may take or place any article or thing upon any
waterfront facility in a safety zone without the permission of the
Captain of the Port.
    (d) Definitions. The Captain of the Port means the Commander of
Sector Delaware Bay or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to act on
her behalf.
    (e) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the Safety Zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.

    Dated: June 10, 2014.
B. Cooper,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2014-14631 Filed 6-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


This workbook contains the air quality data used to estimate the urban excess for calculating weighted emissions scores found in the spreadsheet " For states PM25 areas with emissions score 061404. xls"

Contacts: Tesh Rao, Neil Frank, and Mark Schmidt; Air Quality Trends Analysis Group; OAQPS; EPA Urban Excess PM2.5 DESIGNATIONS  DATA USED IN CALCULATING URBAN EXCESS PERCENTAGES BY PM2.5 COMPONENT PM2.5 Speciation Data from the period 4/ 02  3/ 03 State County MSA EPA Air Quality System ( AQS)

Site Code Carbon Mass Crustal Mass Amm. Sulfate Mass Amm. Nitrate Mass Carbon %

of Mass Crustal % of Mass Sulfates %

of Mass Nitrates %

of Mass Sum of 4 Urban Components Site Code Site Name State Carbon Mass Athens, GA GEORGIA CLARKE Athens, GA 130590001 5.9 0.8 7.7 1.5 37% 5% 48% 10% 15.9 COHU1 Cohutta Georgia 3.0 Atlanta, GA; Macon, GA GEORGIA DE KALB Atlanta, GA 130890002 6.3 0.5 6.5 1.3 43% 3% 45% 9% 14.6 COHU1 Cohutta Georgia 3.0 Baltimore, MD MARYLAND BALTIMORE Baltimore, MD 240053001 6.5 0.6 7.7 2.3 38% 4% 45% 13% 17.2 AREN1 Arendtsville Pennsylvania 3.3 Birmingham, AL ALABAMA JEFFERSON Birmingham, AL 010732003 6.5 1.5 7.3 1.7 38% 9% 43% 10% 17.0 SIPS1 Sipsey Wilderness Alabama 3.7 Canton, OH; Youngstown, OH;

Steubenville, OH WV OHIO MAHONING Youngstown Warren, OH 390990014 5.5 1.0 6.5 3.1 34% 6% 40% 19% 16.1 MKGO1 M. K. Goddard Pennsylvania 3.5 Charleston, WV; Parkersburg, WV OH;

Huntington, WV KY OH KENTUCKY BOYD Huntington Ashland, WV KY OH 210190017 5.7 0.5 8.1 1.7 36% 3% 51% 11% 15.9 QUCI1 Quaker City Ohio 3.0 Chattanooga, TN GA TENNESSEE HAMILTON Chattanooga, TN GA 470654002 6.3 1.0 7.0 1.5 40% 7% 44% 10% 15.9 COHU1 Cohutta Georgia 3.0 Chicago, IL IN WI; Elkhart, IN ILLINOIS COOK Chicago, IL 170310076 4.9 0.8 6.2 4.0 31% 5% 39% 25% 15.9 BOND1 Bondville Illinois 2.6 Cincinnati, OH KY IN KENTUCKY KENTON Cincinnati, OH KY IN 211170007 4.4 0.5 6.9 3.0 30% 3% 47% 20% 14.8 LIVO1 Livonia Indiana 2.8 Cleveland, OH OHIO CUYAHOGA Cleveland Lorain Elyria, OH 390350060 6.5 1.3 6.9 4.3 34% 7% 36% 23% 19.0 MKGO1 M. K. Goddard Pennsylvania 3.5 Columbus, GA AL ALABAMA MONTGOMERY Montgomery, AL 011011002 5.5 0.7 6.1 1.0 42% 5% 46% 7% 13.3 SIPS1 Sipsey Wilderness Alabama 3.7 Columbus, OH; Dayton, OH OHIO BUTLER Hamilton Middletown, OH 390171004 4.3 0.6 6.2 3.2 30% 4% 43% 22% 14.3 LIVO1 Livonia Indiana 2.8 Detroit, MI MICHIGAN WAYNE Detroit, MI 261630001 5.3 0.7 6.0 4.2 33% 5% 37% 26% 16.1 MKGO1 M. K. Goddard Pennsylvania 3.5 Evansville, IN KY KENTUCKY DAVIESS Owensboro, KY 210590014 3.8 0.8 7.3 3.0 26% 5% 49% 20% 14.9 MACA1 Mammoth Cave National PKentucky 3.3 Greensboro, NC NORTH CAROLINA GUILFORD Greensboro Winston Salem High Point, NC 370810013 6.9 2.3 7.3 1.6 38% 13% 40% 9% 18.1 JARI1 James River Face Virginia 3.8 Greenville, SC SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE Greenville Spartanburg Anderson, SC 450450009 5.9 0.5 7.1 1.2 40% 3% 48% 8% 14.7 SHRO1 Shining Rock Wilderness North Carolina 2.9 Hickory, NC NORTH CAROLINA MECKLENBURG Charlotte Gastonia Rock Hill, NC SC 371190041 5.8 0.5 6.8 1.3 40% 3% 47% 9% 14.3 LIGO1 Linville Gorge North Carolina 3.0 Indianapolis, IN INDIANA MARION Indianapolis, IN 180970078 5.2 0.7 6.9 4.2 31% 4% 40% 25% 17.1 LIVO1 Livonia Indiana 2.8 Knoxville, KY NORTH CAROLINA BUNCOMBE Asheville, NC 370210034 4.8 0.5 6.4 1.1 37% 4% 50% 9% 12.7 SHRO1 Shining Rock Wilderness North Carolina 2.9 Lexington, KY KENTUCKY FAYETTE Lexington, KY 210670012 4.1 0.5 7.2 3.1 27% 3% 49% 21% 14.9 LIVO1 Livonia Indiana 2.8 Lincoln County, MT MONTANA LINCOLN Not in a MSA 300530018 14.5 0.6 1.0 0.8 85% 4% 6% 5% 17.0 CABI1 Cabinet Mountains Montana 2.4 Los Angeles, CA CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Riverside San Bernardino, CA 060658001 9.4 1.4 4.6 15.9 30% 4% 15% 51% 31.2 SAGO1 San Gorgonio Wilderness California 2.9 Louisville, KY IN KENTUCKY JEFFERSON Louisville, KY IN 211110043 5.5 0.7 6.8 2.9 35% 4% 43% 18% 15.8 LIVO1 Livonia Indiana 2.8 New York, NY NJ CT PA NEW JERSEY UNION Newark, NJ 340390004 7.9 0.7 5.9 3.1 45% 4% 34% 17% 17.5 BRIG1 Brigantine National WildlifeNew Jersey 3.4 Philadelphia, PA NJ DE MD PENNSYLVANIA DELAWARE Philadelphia, PA NJ 420450002 6.1 0.6 6.9 3.1 36% 4% 41% 19% 16.7 BRIG1 Brigantine National WildlifeNew Jersey 3.4 Reading, PA; Lancaster, PA PENNSYLVANIA LANCASTER Lancaster, PA 420710007 5.6 0.6 7.9 5.5 29% 3% 40% 28% 19.6 AREN1 Arendtsville Pennsylvania 3.3 San Diego, CA CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO San Diego, CA 060730003 6.6 0.7 4.1 5.1 40% 4% 25% 31% 16.5 AGTI1 Agua Tibia California 2.7 San Joaquin, CA CALIFORNIA KERN Bakersfield, CA 060290014 8.9 1.4 2.7 8.1 42% 7% 13% 38% 21.1 DOME1 Dome Lands Wilderness California 3.5 St, Louis, MO IL MISSOURI ST LOUIS ( CITY) St, Louis, MO IL 295100085 6.1 1.3 6.2 3.8 35% 8% 36% 22% 17.4 MING1 Mingo Missouri 2.5 Toledo, OH OHIO LUCAS Toledo, OH 390950026 4.7 0.5 5.4 4.6 31% 3% 35% 30% 15.3 QUCI1 Quaker City Ohio 3.0 Washington, DC MD VA WV DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON Washington, DC MD VA WV 110010043 5.5 0.6 7.5 2.4 34% 4% 47% 15% 15.9 AREN1 Arendtsville Pennsylvania 3.3 Wheeling, WV OH; Pittsburgh, PA;

Marion County, WV; Johnstown, PA PENNSYLVANIA WESTMORELAND Pittsburgh, PA 421290008 5.7 0.7 8.7 2.3 33% 4% 50% 13% 17.4 DOSO1 Dolly Sods / Otter Creek WWest Virginia 3.1 York, PA; Harrisburg, PA PENNSYLVANIA DAUPHIN Harrisburg Lebanon Carlisle, PA 420430401 6.1 0.5 7.0 3.6 35% 3% 41% 21% 17.2 AREN1 Arendtsville Pennsylvania 3.3 URBAN PM2.5 SPECIATION MONITORING SITE INFORMATION REGIONAL PM2.5 SPECIATION MONITORING SITE Metropolitan Area( s) with Violating Monitor Page 2 Urban Excess Page 3 Urban Excess Page 4 Urban Excess Crustal Mass Amm. Sulfate Mass Amm. Nitrate Mass Carbon %

of Mass Crustal % of Mass Sulfates %

of Mass Nitrates %

of Mass Sum of 4 Regional Components Carbon Mass Crustal Mass Sulfates Mass Nitrates Mass Sum of 4 Components Carbon % Crustal % Sulfates % Nitrates %

0.5 6.2 1.2 28% 5% 57% 11% 10.9 2.9 0.3 1.5 0.4 5.1 57% 5% 30% 7%

0.5 6.2 1.2 28% 5% 57% 11% 10.9 3.3 0.0 0.4 0.1 3.8 88% 0% 10% 3%

0.6 7.2 2.5 24% 4% 53% 19% 13.6 3.3 0.1 0.5 0.0 3.8 85% 2% 13% 0%

0.7 6.6 1.4 30% 5% 53% 11% 12.3 2.8 0.8 0.7 0.3 4.7 60% 18% 16% 6%

0.6 6.0 1.9 29% 5% 50% 16% 11.9 2.1 0.4 0.5 1.2 4.2 49% 10% 11% 30%

0.8 7.8 1.5 23% 6% 59% 12% 13.1 2.7 0.0 0.3 0.2 3.2 84% 0% 10% 6%

0.5 6.2 1.2 28% 5% 57% 11% 10.9 3.3 0.5 0.8 0.4 5.1 66% 10% 17% 7%

0.8 5.3 3.7 21% 6% 43% 30% 12.3 2.3 0.1 0.9 0.3 3.6 65% 2% 25% 8%

0.7 6.8 2.7 21% 6% 52% 21% 13.0 1.6 0.0 0.1 0.3 2.1 78% 0% 7% 15%

0.6 6.0 1.9 29% 5% 50% 16% 11.9 3.0 0.8 0.9 2.4 7.1 42% 11% 13% 34%

0.7 6.6 1.4 30% 5% 53% 11% 12.3 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 100% 0% 0% 0%

0.7 6.8 2.7 21% 6% 52% 21% 13.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.6 2.1 73% 0% 0% 27%

0.6 6.0 1.9 29% 5% 50% 16% 11.9 1.8 0.2 0.0 2.3 4.3 42% 4% 0% 54%

0.7 6.8 1.8 26% 5% 54% 14% 12.7 0.5 0.1 0.4 1.1 2.2 23% 6% 20% 51%

0.6 6.9 0.9 31% 5% 56% 8% 12.2 3.1 1.7 0.5 0.6 6.0 52% 29% 8% 11%

0.7 7.6 0.5 25% 6% 66% 4% 11.6 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 3.8 81% 0% 0% 19%

0.5 6.7 0.6 28% 5% 62% 5% 10.7 2.8 0.0 0.1 0.7 3.6 77% 0% 3% 20%

0.7 6.8 2.7 21% 6% 52% 21% 13.0 2.4 0.0 0.1 1.6 4.1 59% 0% 3% 38%

0.7 7.6 0.5 25% 6% 66% 4% 11.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.6 2.5 75% 0% 0% 25%

0.7 6.8 2.7 21% 6% 52% 21% 13.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.4 2.2 60% 0% 22% 19%

0.8 0.8 0.3 56% 20% 18% 6% 4.2 12.1 0.0 0.2 0.6 13.0 93% 0% 2% 5%

1.2 1.8 4.6 28% 11% 17% 44% 10.5 6.5 0.2 2.8 11.3 20.7 31% 1% 14% 55%

0.7 6.8 2.7 21% 6% 52% 21% 13.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.9 93% 0% 0% 7%

0.5 5.5 1.4 32% 5% 51% 13% 10.9 4.4 0.2 0.4 1.6 6.6 67% 3% 6% 25%

0.5 5.5 1.4 32% 5% 51% 13% 10.9 2.6 0.1 1.4 1.7 5.8 45% 2% 24% 29%

0.6 7.2 2.5 24% 4% 53% 19% 13.6 2.3 0.0 0.7 3.0 6.0 39% 0% 11% 50%

1.2 2.8 2.6 29% 13% 30% 28% 9.3 3.9 0.0 1.3 2.5 7.7 51% 0% 16% 33%

1.2 1.6 2.0 42% 15% 20% 23% 8.4 5.4 0.2 1.0 6.1 12.8 42% 2% 8% 48%

1.0 5.6 2.0 22% 9% 51% 18% 11.1 3.6 0.3 0.5 1.8 6.2 58% 5% 8% 29%

0.8 7.8 1.5 23% 6% 59% 12% 13.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 3.1 4.8 36% 0% 0% 64%

0.6 7.2 2.5 24% 4% 53% 19% 13.6 2.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.5 88% 1% 11% 0%

0.5 7.2 0.9 26% 5% 62% 8% 11.7 2.6 0.2 1.5 1.4 5.7 46% 3% 27% 24%

0.6 7.2 2.5 24% 4% 53% 19% 13.6 2.8 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.9 72% 0% 0% 28%

TE INFORMATION URBAN EXCESS INFORMATION Page 5 Urban Excess Page 6 Urban Excess Page 7 Urban Excess Page 8 Urban Excess Page 9 Urban Excess Page 10 Urban Excess Page 11 Urban Excess Page 12 Urban Excess Page 13 Urban Excess Page 14 Urban Excess Page 15 Urban Excess Page 16 Urban Excess Page 17 Urban Excess Page 18 Urban Excess Page 19 Data Analysis Process 1. Chemical composition data from urban sites ( from the EPA Speciation Network, or ESpN) and regional sites ( from the IMPROVE visibility monitoring network) were analyzed for the 12 months extending from April 2002 to March 2003. Complete sites were chosen if they had 11 complete observations per quarter for all major PM2.5 species for all 4 quarters of interest. The worksheet ' Map 1' displays the locations of urban and regional monitors that met the 2. For every complete urban ESpN site, the nearest IMPROVE site was identified using a geographic information system. Note that in some cases, the same IMPROVE site is used as the " regional site" for more than one of the urban locations. Sipsey, Shining Rock, Cohutta, Brigantine, Quaker City, Livonia, and Arendtville are IMPROVE sites that are used more than once to represent regional concentrations for metro areas in the eastern U. S. The worksheet ' Map 2' shows the 137 urban sites and the IMPROVE sites paired with them. These site pairings were then used to estimate urban excess percentages by PM2.5 component. 3. Only data for site pairs associated with metro areas having a violating monitor are included in this PM2.5 designations worksheet. If a metro area did not have an urban speciation site with complete data, then PM2.5 urban excess percentages from the closest urban regional site pair were used as a surrogate for the area. Some violating metro areas had more than one complete urban ESpN site; in those situations, the urban ESpN site with the highest gravimetric mass was used to calculate the weighted emissions scores.

4. Ammonium sulfate ( a. k. a. ' sulfates') is calculated as 4.125 * sulfur. Ammonium nitrate ( a. k. a. ' nitrates') is calculated as 1.29 * nitrate. TCM is equal to elemental carbon + ( 1.4 * organic carbon). Crustal mass is calculated according to the methodology used in the IMPROVE program. All data have been corrected for elevation.

5. For each PM2.5 component, the urban increment mass is estimated by subtracting the regional mass from the urban mass. The sum of these four components is the total urban increment mass. ( In cases where regional mass for a component exceeds the urban mass, the urban increment mass for that component was assumed to be zero.) The percentage that each PM2.5 component comprises of the total urban increment mass was then calculated. These component percentages were used in calculating the weighted emissions scores in the spreadsheet " For states PM25 areas with emissions score 061404. xls." Complete Urban and Rural Monitors for Apr 02

Blue Closed Circles are Complete ESPN Monitors ( N= 137) Pink Open Squares are Complete IMPROVE Monitors ( N= 1 pr 02 Mar 03 = 137) s ( N= 155) MATCHED URBAN and RURAL SITES ( April 2002 M Pink Squares: Rural Locations ( N = 58) Blue Dots: Urban Locations ( N = 137) 002 Mar 2003)


[Federal Register: November 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 229)]
[Notices]
[Page 72089]
[DOCID:fr26no08-108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Sunday, November
23, 2008, at 12 p.m.
    Commissioners and certain staff members who have an interest in the
matter will attend the Closed Meeting.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions as set
forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(8) and (9) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(8) and (9),
permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Paredes, as duty officer, voted to consider the item
listed for the closed meeting in closed session and determined that no
earlier notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Sunday,
November 23, 2008, will be:

A matter related to a financial institution.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact: The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 23, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-28239 Filed 11-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 190 (Monday, October 3, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59692-59695]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21252]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2022-0121; FRL-9823-02-R3]

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards Nonattainment New Source Review Certification SIP

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. The revision will fulfill Pennsylvania's nonattainment
new source review (NNSR) SIP element requirement for the 2015 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). EPA is approving
these revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 2, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2022-0121. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on

the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through
www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Leary, Permits Branch (3AD10),
Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, Four Penn Center 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Mr. Leary can also be reached via electronic
mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On May 31, 2022 (87 FR 32379), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the NPRM,
EPA proposed approval of Pennsylvania's existing Federally-approved
NNSR regulations for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The formal SIP
revision was submitted by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) on behalf of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
(Commonwealth or Pennsylvania) on January 8, 2021.
    Pennsylvania is certifying that the Commonwealth's federally
approved nonattainment new source review regulation in 25 Pennsylvania
Code of Regulations (Pa. Code) Chapter 127 applies statewide and covers
the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment
area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Pennsylvania asserts that its
nonattainment new source review program is at least as stringent as the
requirements at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.165, as amended
by the final rule titled ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State
Implementation Plan Requirements'' (SRR) for ozone and its precursors.
See 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    This rulemaking action is specific to Pennsylvania's NNSR
requirements. NNSR is a preconstruction review permit program that
applies to new major stationary sources or major modifications at
existing sources located in a nonattainment area. The specific NNSR
requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS are located in 40 CFR
51.160-165.
    The minimum SIP requirements for NNSR permitting programs for the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS are located in 40 CFR 51.165. See 40 CFR
51.1314. Under the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS NNSR SIP requirements, the
SIP for each ozone nonattainment area must contain NNSR provisions
that: (1) set major source thresholds for oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) pursuant to 40
CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)-(iv); (2) classify physical changes as a
major source if the change would constitute a major source by itself
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3); (3) consider any significant
net emissions increase of NOX as a significant net emissions
increase for ozone pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E); (4) consider
certain increases of VOC emissions in extreme ozone nonattainment areas
as a significant net emissions increase and a major modification for
ozone pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(F); (5) set significant
emissions rates for VOCs and NOX as ozone precursors
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)(A)-(C) and (E); (6) contain
provisions for emissions reductions credits pursuant to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)-(2); (7) provide that the requirements
applicable to VOC also apply to NOX pursuant to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(8); and (8) set offset ratios for VOC and NOX
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i)-(iii) (renumbered as (a)(9)(ii)-(iv)
under the SIP Requirements Rule for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS).
    Pennsylvania's SIP approved NNSR program, established in the Pa.
Code Rule 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127--Construction, Modification,
Reactivation, and Operation of Sources, applies to the construction and
modification of major stationary sources in nonattainment areas. In the
October 30, 2017, SIP revision, Pennsylvania certifies that the version
of 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127 in the SIP is at least as stringent as the
Federal NNSR requirements for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic
City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment area. EPA last approved revisions to
Pennsylvania's major NNSR SIP on February 22, 2019. In that action, EPA
approved Pennsylvania's NNSR program under the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
and made PADEP's NNSR program consistent with Federal requirements. See
84 FR 5598 (February 22, 2019). The version of 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127
that is contained in the current SIP and covers the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment area and is
adequate to meet all applicable NNSR requirements for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS found in 40 CFR 51.165, and the SRR.
    Other specific requirements of the SRR and the rationale for EPA's
proposed action are explained in the NPRM and will not be restated
here.

III. EPA's Response to Comments Received

    EPA received one comment on our proposed approval of Pennsylvania's
2015 Ozone NNSR Certification SIP. A summary of the comment and EPA's
response is provided herein. The comment received is included in the
docket for this action.
    Comment: The commenter asserts that EPA failed to address the fact
that Pennsylvania submitted a letter withdrawing specific portions of
the January 8, 2021, SIP revision submittal related to inter-precursor
trading (IPT) provisions. In doing so, EPA has proposed an approval
without excluding the IPT provision that unlawfully allows IPT to
satisfy the Clean Air Act's offset requirements for ozone precursors.
The commentor asserts that EPA must state explicitly in its final
action that it is not approving the IPT provisions of the January 8,
2021, SIP and that it is approving, as a SIP commitment, Pennsylvania's
promise not to issue any NNSR permits or plan approvals that rely on
IPT. Finally, the commentor asserts that the approval should be
conditional on Pennsylvania following through on their commitment to
remove ozone related IPT provision from the commonwealth's regulations.
    Response: On January 29, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit concluded that ozone IPT trading is not
permissible under the CAA and vacated ozone IPT trading, i.e., the IPT
trading provision in the Federal NNSR regulations. Sierra Club v. EPA,
985 F.3d 1055 (D.C. Cir. 2021). EPA removed the language allowing IPT
trading for ozone from its NNSR regulations. 86 FR 37918 (July 19,
2021). In response to that the July 19, 2021, rule, on August 23, 2021,
PADEP sent a letter to EPA that withdrew from EPA's review the specific
portions of PADEP's January 8, 2021, SIP revision submittal that
related to inter-precursor trading (IPT).
    EPA agrees with comment to the extent that EPA should have
affirmatively addressed the August 23, 2021, letter and the fact that
PADEP had withdrawn from EPA review the (IPT) provisions submitted with
the January 8, 2021, SIP revision. Pennsylvania clearly intends to not
apply the IPT provisions to ozone as made evident by the August 23,
2021, letter to the EPA.

Furthermore, we acknowledged in this action that the provisions for IPT
for ozone had been withdrawn from our consideration, as reflected by
our inclusion of the August 23, 2021, letter in the docket for the
action. Therefore, EPA's proposed approval of Pennsylvania's 2015 ozone
NNSR certification SIP did not at any time include a proposed approval
of any provisions relating to IPT for ozone, consistent with the D.C.
Circuit's decision. EPA affirms that, in light of the D.C. Circuit's
decision (and consistent with Pennsylvania's explicitly stated intent
in the withdrawal letter), it would be inappropriate for Pennsylvania
to issue NNSR permits which relied on IPT for ozone precursors.
Pennsylvania's regulations for the issuance of plan approvals provide
for public notice and comment, in accordance with CAA requirements. EPA
has the ability to review and comment on any deficiency in a draft plan
approval, including an inappropriate use of IPT for ozone.
    However, EPA disagrees with the commentor's assertion that the
approval must be conditional on Pennsylvania following through on its
commitment to remove the IPT provisions in the commonwealth's
regulations. This action only addresses the adequacy of Pennsylvania's
SIP for purposes of implementing the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Because of the
withdrawal reflected in the Commonwealth's August 23, 2021, letter, the
IPT language in Pennsylvania's regulations is not before EPA for
approval in this action. Since the Pennsylvania provisions included in
this SIP submission are adequate for purposes of implementing the 2015
ozone standard, Pennsylvania's 2015 Ozone NNSR Certification SIP is
approvable without the condition requested by the commenter.

IV. Final Action

    EPA's review of this material indicates that Pennsylvania's
submission fulfills the 40 CFR 51.1114 revision requirement, meets the
requirements of CAA sections 110 and 172 and the minimum SIP
requirements of 40 CFR 51.165. Therefore, we are finalizing our
approval of Pennsylvania's NNSR SIP for 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is 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.);
     Does 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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is 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
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 2, 2022. 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 pertaining to Pennsylvania's 2015 Ozone NNSR
Certification may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 part 52 is amended as
follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL 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 NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
an entry for

``2015 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard Nonattainment
New Source Review Requirements'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Name of non-regulatory SIP       Applicable          State         EPA approval
           revision              geographic area  submittal  date        date           Additional explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS         Pennsylvania's    1/8/21; 8/23/21  10/3/22, Insert
 Nonattainment New Source        portion of the                     Federal
 Review Requirements.            Philadelphia-                      Register
                                 Wilmington-                        citation].
                                 Atlantic City,
                                 PA-NJ-MD-DE
                                 area (includes
                                 Bucks, Chester,
                                 Delaware,
                                 Montgomery, and
                                 Philadelphia
                                 Counties).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-21252 Filed 9-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4051-4053]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00559]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0804; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-094-AD;
Amendment 39-17316; AD 2013-01-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD,
747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F,
747SR, and 747SP series airplanes; and certain Model 757-200, -200PF,
and -300 series airplanes. That AD currently requires replacing the
control switches of the forward, aft, and nose cargo doors of Model 747
airplanes; and requires replacing the control switches of cargo doors 1
and 2 of Model 757 series airplanes. This new AD adds airplanes to the
applicability and revises the initial compliance times for those
airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of problems associated with
the uncommanded operation of cargo doors. We are issuing this AD to
prevent injuries to persons and damage to the airplane and equipment.

DATES: This AD is effective February 22, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of February 22,
2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of
December 3, 2009 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francis Smith, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety & Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763,
October 29, 2009). That AD applies to the specified products. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on August 3, 2012 (77 FR 46343). That
NPRM proposed to continue to require replacing the control switches of
the forward, aft, and nose cargo doors of Model 747 airplanes; and the
control switches of cargo doors 1 and 2 of Model 757 airplanes. That
NPRM also proposed to add airplanes to the applicability and to revise
the initial compliance times for those airplanes.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012)

    Boeing supported the NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012).
    American Airlines found that the NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012)
would not require additional actions for its Model 757 fleet;
therefore, American Airlines had no comments concerning the NPRM.

Request for Clarification of Proposed Compliance Times

    Asiana Airlines requested that we clarify the compliance times
specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012).
Specifically, Asiana Airlines requested clarification of the compliance
times for Model 747 Groups 1 and 2 airplanes on which the door switches
had been replaced before the effective date of AD 2009-22-08, Amendment
39-16059 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009), per Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, dated September 28, 2007; and on which
the certificate of airworthiness had been issued long before 72 months
after the effective date of AD 2009-22-08.
    We agree to provide clarification. Paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
restates the compliance time from AD 2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74
FR 55763, October 29, 2009) for Groups 1 and 2 Model 747 airplanes
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286,
Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010. If an operator has already replaced
the switches before the effective date of this AD in accordance with
either Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, dated
September 28, 2007; or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-
52-2286, Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010; then no further action is
necessary for compliance with paragraph (g) of this AD. No change to
this AD is necessary.

Explanation of Change Made to This AD

    We have added new paragraph (i)(3) to this final rule to allow
delegation of repairs to the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA). We have re-identified subsequent
paragraphs accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the change described previously--and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 46343, August 3, 2012).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 225 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Cost per        Number of      Cost on U.S.
            Action                Labor cost      Parts cost        product         airplanes       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement [retained from     Up to 5 work-              $195  Up to $620.....             221  Up to $137,020.
 existing AD 2009-22-08,        hours x $85
 Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR      per hour =
 55763, October 29, 2009)].     $425.
Replacement [new action for    5 work-hours x              195  $620...........               4  $2,480.
 added airplanes].              $85 per hour =
                                $425.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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 AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009), and
adding the following new AD:

2013-01-02 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17316; Docket No. FAA-
2012-0804; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-094-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective February 22,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR
55763, October 29, 2009).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B,
747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-
400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated in
any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010; and Model
757-200, -200PF, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as indentified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-52-0090, dated September 21, 2007.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of problems associated with the
uncommanded operation of cargo doors. We are issuing this AD to
prevent injuries to persons and damage to the airplane and
equipment.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Replacement

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD
2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009), with
revised compliance times and service information. Replace the
control switches, as specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this
AD, as applicable. Repeat the replacements thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 72 months.
    (1) For Groups 1 and 2 Model 747 airplanes identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision 1, dated
October 28, 2010: Within 24 months after December 3, 2009 (the
effective date of AD 2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763,
October 29, 2009)), or within 72 months from the date of issuance of
the original certificate of airworthiness or the original export
certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs later, replace the
control switches of the forward, aft, and nose cargo doors, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, dated September 28, 2007; or
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision 1,
dated October 28, 2010. As of the effective date of this AD, use
only Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision
1, dated October 28, 2010, to do the actions specified in this
paragraph.
    (2) For Model 757 series airplanes: Within 24 months after
December 3, 2009 (the

effective date of AD 2009-22-08, Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763,
October 29, 2009)), replace the control switches of cargo doors 1
and 2, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-52-0090, dated September 21,
2007.

(h) New Replacement

    For Group 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010:
Within 72 months from the date of issuance of the original
certificate of airworthiness or the original export certificate of
airworthiness, or within 12 months after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later, replace the control switches of the
forward, aft, and nose cargo doors, as applicable, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010.
Repeat the replacements thereafter at intervals not to exceed 72
months.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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. 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. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2009-22-08,
Amendment 39-16059 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009), are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Francis Smith,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety & Environmental Systems Branch,
ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
February 22, 2013.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286,
Revision 1, dated October 28, 2010.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
December 3, 2009 (74 FR 55763, October 29, 2009).
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-52-2286, dated
September 28, 2007.
    (ii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-52-0090,
dated September 21, 2007.
    (5) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 4, 2013.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.

[FR Doc. 2013-00559 Filed 1-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5523-5524]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01964]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94066; File No. SR-FICC-2021-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change To Enhance Capital Requirements and Make Other
Changes

January 26, 2022.
    On December 13, 2021, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
proposed rule change SR-FICC-2021-009 (the ``Proposed Rule Change'')
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The Proposed Rule Change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on December 29,
2021,\3\ and the Commission received no comment letters regarding the
changes proposed in the Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93857 (December 22,
2021), 86 FR 74130 (December 29, 2021) (File No. SR-FICC-2021-009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up

to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer
period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as
to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission
shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed
rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day after publication of
the notice for the Proposed Rule Change is February 12, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is extending the 45-day period for Commission action
on the Proposed Rule Change. The Commission finds that it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the Proposed Rule Change so that it has sufficient time to consider and
take action on the Proposed Rule Change.
    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ and for
the reasons stated above, the Commission designates March 29, 2022 as
the date by which the Commission shall either approve, disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove proposed rule
change SR-FICC-2021-009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01964 Filed 1-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 13316]
[DOCID:fr21mr07-94]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation Of Previous Announcement: [To be Published].

Status: Closed Meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Date And Time Of Previously Announced Meeting: Wednesday, March 21,
2007 at 2 p.m.

Change In The Meeting: Time Change.
    The Closed Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 2
p.m. has been changed to Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 1 p.m.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact the Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Dated: March 16, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5131 Filed 3-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P