[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22523-22525]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9061]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0189]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; 2012 Ocean City Air Show; Atlantic Ocean, Ocean
City, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a safety zone on the
navigable waters of the Atlantic Ocean in Ocean City, MD. This action
is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters
during the 2012 Ocean City Air Show. This action is intended to
restrict vessel traffic movement to protect mariners from the hazards
associated with air show events.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 16, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2012-0189 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: 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.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Christopher O'Neal, Waterways Management Division
Chief, Sector Hampton Roads, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2012-0189), 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 (via 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 via www.regulations.gov, 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,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2012-0189'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. 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.

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,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2012-0189'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
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. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

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).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four 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.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact LCDR Chris O'Neal at the telephone number or email address
indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
notice.

Basis and Purpose

    On June 8, 2012 through June 10, 2012, the Town of Ocean City will
host an air show event over the Atlantic Ocean in Ocean City, MD. In
recent years, there have been unfortunate instances of jets and planes
crashing during performances at air shows. Along with a jet or plane
crash, there is typically a wide area of scattered debris that also
damages property and could cause significant injury or death to
mariners observing the air shows. Due to the need to protect mariners
and the public transiting the Atlantic Ocean immediately below the air
show from hazards associated with the air show, a Coast Guard
established safety zone bound by the following coordinates will be
enforced: 38[deg],21',38'' N/075[deg],04',04'' W, 38[deg],21',27'' N/
075[deg],03',29'' W, 38[deg],19',35'' N/075[deg],04',19'' W,
38[deg],19',45'' N/075[deg],04',54'' W (NAD 1983). Access to this area
will be temporarily restricted for public safety purposes.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes establishing a safety zone on specified
waters of the Atlantic Ocean bounded by the following coordinates:
38[deg],21',38'' N/075[deg],04',04'' W, 38[deg],21',27'' N/
075[deg],03',29'' W, 38[deg],19',35'' N/075[deg],04',19'' W,
38[deg],19',45'' N/075[deg],04',54'' W (NAD 1983), in the vicinity of
Talbot Street and 33rd Street in Ocean City, MD. This safety zone is
proposed in the interest of public safety during the 2012 Ocean City
Air Show and will be enforced from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 8,
2012, from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 9, 2012, and 10 a.m. until 4
p.m. on June 10, 2012. Access to the safety zone will be restricted
during the specified date and times. Except for vessels authorized by
the Captain of the Port or his Representative, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the safety zone.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this
proposed regulation restricts access to the safety zone, the effect of
this rule will not be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be
in effect for a limited duration; (ii) the zone is of limited size; and
(iii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories
so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the zone will only be in place for a
limited duration and maritime advisories will be issued allowing the
mariners to adjust their plans accordingly.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the Atlantic Ocean
from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 8, 2012, from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on
June 9, 2012, and from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 10, 2012.
    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.

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 proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 LCDR Christopher O'Neal,
Waterways Management Division Chief, Sector Hampton Roads, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast
Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed 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.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed 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.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Upon receipt of
consultation comments all documentation will be made available in the
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule involves
establishing a temporary safety zone. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed 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 proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

    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 and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

    2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0189 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0189  Safety Zone; 2012 Ocean City Air Show, Atlantic
Ocean, Ocean City, MD.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: Specified
waters of the Captain of the Port Sector Hampton Roads zone, as defined
in 33 CFR 3.25-10, in the vicinity of the Atlantic Ocean in Virginia
Beach, VA bound by the following coordinates: 38[deg],21',38'' N/
075[deg],04',04'' W, 38[deg],21',27'' N/075[deg],03',29'' W,
38[deg],19',35'' N/075[deg],04',19'' W, 38[deg],19',45'' N/
075[deg],04',54'' W (NAD 1983), in the vicinity of Ocean City,
Maryland.
    (b) Definition: For the purposes of this part, Captain of the Port
Representative means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port,
Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf.
    (c) Regulations: (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated
representatives.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel
that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast
Guard Ensign.
    (3) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads can be reached through
the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia
at telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can
be contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 13 (165.65Mhz) and
channel 16 (156.8 Mhz).
    (d) Enforcement Period: This regulation will be enforced from 10
a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 8, 2012, from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 9,
2012, and from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. on June 10, 2012.

    Dated: March 14, 2012.
Mark S. Ogle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. 2012-9061 Filed 4-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 133)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 39803-39804]
[DOCID:fr13jy10-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0308; Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-17-AD;
Amendment 39-16366; AD 2010-14-21]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Model
TAE 125-01 Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Service has shown that the small outlet of the blow-by oil
separators, part number 02-7250-18100R1; 02-7250-18100R2; 02-7250-
18100R3; 02-7250-18100R4; 02-7250-18300R1; 02-7250-18300R2; 02-7250-
18300R3; 02-7250-18300R4; or 02-7250-18300R5, may cause a blow-by
gas pressure increase inside the crankcase of the engine in excess
of the oil seal design pressure limits. Leaking engine oil may
adversely affect the gearbox clutch or the engine lubrication
system. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight
cases of engine power loss or ultimately, shutdown.

We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of engine power or uncommanded
engine shutdown during flight due to excessive crankcase blow-by gas
pressure.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 17, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in this AD as of August 17, 2010.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara Chaidez, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2010 (75 FR
17084). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that:

    Service has shown that the small outlet of the blow-by
separators, part number 02-7250-18100R1; 02-7250-18100R2; 02-7250-
18100R3; 02-7250-18100R4; 02-7250-18300R1; 02-7250-18300R2; 02-7250-
18300R3; 02-7250-18300R4; or 02-7250-18300R5, may cause a blow-by
gas pressure increase inside the crankcase of the engine in excess
of the oil seal design pressure limits. Leaking engine oil may
adversely affect the gearbox clutch or the engine lubrication
system. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight
cases of engine power loss or ultimately, shutdown.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 250 Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH model TAE 125-01
engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it will take about 1.5 work-hours per engine to comply with this AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost
about $1,500 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of the AD on U.S. operators to be $406,875.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
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 street address for
the Docket Operations office (phone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is provided 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 adding the following new AD:

2010-14-21 Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH: Amendment 39-16366.
Docket No. FAA-2010-0308; Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-17-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August
17, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH model TAE
125-01 reciprocating engines with any of the following part number
blow-by oil separators installed:

                            Table 1--Part Numbers of Affected Blow-By Oil Separators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              02-7250-18100R1                       02-7250-18100R2                       02-7250-18100R3
              02-7250-18100R4                       02-7250-18300R1                       02-7250-18300R2
              02-7250-18300R3                       02-7250-18300R4                       02-7250-18300R5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These engines are installed in, but not limited to, Diamond
Aircraft Industries Model DA 40, Piper PA-28-161 (Supplemental Type
Certificate (STC) No. SA03303AT), and Cessna 172 (STC No. SA01303WI)
airplanes.

Reason

    (d) Service has shown that the small outlet of the blow-by oil
separators, part number 02-7250-18100R1; 02-7250-18100R2; 02-7250-
18100R3; 02-7250-18100R4; 02-7250-18300R1; 02-7250-18300R2; 02-7250-
18300R3; 02-7250-18300R4; or 02-7250-18300R5, may cause a blow-by
gas pressure increase inside the crankcase of the engine in excess
of the oil seal design pressure limits. Leaking engine oil may
adversely affect the gearbox clutch or the engine lubrication
system. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight
cases of engine power loss or ultimately, shutdown.
    This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of engine power or
uncommanded engine shutdown during flight due to excessive crankcase
blow-by gas pressure.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Remove the blow-by oil separators listed by part number in
Table 1 of this AD within the next 110 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD.
    (2) Use the Measures section of Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH
Service Bulletin No. TM TAE 125-0019, Revision 1, dated March 5,
2009, to do the removal from service.

FAA AD Differences

    (f) None.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2010-0020, dated
February 8, 2010, for related information.
    (i) Contact Tara Chaidez, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for more information about this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service Bulletin
No. TM TAE 125-0019, Revision 1, dated March 5, 2009, to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350,
Lichtenstein, Germany, telephone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-
696- 55; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or 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 Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 1, 2010.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-16618 Filed 7-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21049-21052]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07948]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88621; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2020-28]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Equities Fees and Charges

April 10, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on April 1, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and
Charges (``Fee Schedule'') to amend the requirement to qualify for the
tiered-rebate structure applicable to Lead Market Makers and to ETP
Holders affiliated with such Lead Market Makers. The proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to amend the
requirement to qualify for the tiered-rebate structure applicable to
Lead Market Makers (``LMMs''),\4\ and to ETP Holders \5\ affiliated
with such LMMs, that provide displayed liquidity in Tape B securities
to the NYSE Arca Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``Lead Market Maker'' is defined in Rule 1.1(w) to
mean a registered Market Maker that is the exclusive Designated
Market Maker in listings for which the Exchange is the primary
market.
    \5\ All references to ETP Holders in connection with this
proposed fee change include Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change responds to the current competitive environment
where order flow providers have a choice of where to direct liquidity-
providing orders by offering further incentives for ETP Holders and
LMMs to send additional displayed liquidity to the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective April
1, 2020.
Background
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Commission itself recognized, the market for trading
services in NMS stocks has become ``more fragmented and competitive.''
\7\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across 13
exchanges,\8\ numerous alternative trading systems,\9\ and broker-
dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order flow.
Based on publicly-available information, no single exchange currently
has more than 20% market share (whether including or excluding auction
volume).\10\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power
in the execution of equity order flow. More specifically, the Exchange
currently has less than 12% market share of executed volume of equities
trading.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 84 FR 5202,
5253 (February 20, 2019) (File No. S7-05-18) (Final Rule).
    \8\ See Cboe U.S Equities Market Volume Summary, available at
https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share. See generally
https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
    \9\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
    \10\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
    \11\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products. While it is not possible to know a firm's reason for shifting
order flow, the Exchange believes that one such reason is because of
fee changes at any of the registered exchanges or non-exchange venues
to which a firm routes order flow. With respect to non-

marketable order flow that would provide displayed liquidity on an
Exchange against which market makers can quote, ETP Holders and LMMs
can choose from any one of the 13 currently operating registered
exchanges to route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain exchange transaction fees and credits that relate to orders
that would provide displayed liquidity on an exchange.
Proposed Rule Change
    The proposed rule change is designed to be available to all LMMs on
the Exchange, and is intended to provide ETP Holders and LMMs an
opportunity to receive enhanced rebates by quoting and trading more on
the Exchange.
    The Exchange currently provides tier-based incremental credits for
orders that provide displayed liquidity in Tape B securities to the
NYSE Arca Book.\12\ Specifically, LMMs that are registered as the LMM
in Tape B securities that have a consolidated average daily volume
(``CADV'') in the prior calendar quarter of less than 100,000 shares,
or 0.010% of Consolidated Tape B ADV, whichever is greater (``Less
Active ETP Securities''), and the ETP Holders affiliated with such
LMMs, currently receive an incremental credit for orders that provide
displayed liquidity to the Book in any Tape B securities that trade on
the Exchange.\13\ The current incremental credits and volume thresholds
are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 76084 (October 6,
2015), 80 FR 61529 (October 13, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-87); 79597
(December 19, 2016), 81 FR 94460 (December 23, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-
2016-165); 85094 (February 11, 2019), 84 FR 4579 (February 15, 2019)
(SR-NYSEArca-2019-05); and 88436 (March 20, 2020), 85 FR 17112
(March 26, 2020) (SR-NYSEArca-2020-21).
    \13\ The Exchange defines ``affiliate'' to ``mean any ETP Holder
under 75% common ownership or control of that ETP Holder.'' See Fee
Schedule, NYSE Arca Marketplace: General.

 An additional credit of $0.0004 per share if an LMM is
registered as the LMM in at least 400 Less Active ETP Securities or at
least 300 Less Active ETP Securities if the LMM and ETP Holders and
Market Makers affiliated with such LMM add liquidity in all securities
of at least 1.00% of US CADV
 An additional credit of $0.0003 per share if an LMM is
registered as the LMM in at least 200 but less than 400 Less Active ETP
Securities or in at least 200 but less than 300 Less Active ETP
Securities if the LMM and ETP Holders and Market Makers affiliated with
such LMM add liquidity in all securities of at least 1.00% of US CADV
 An additional credit of $0.0002 per share if an LMM is
registered as the LMM in at least 100 but less than 200 Less Active ETP
Securities
 An additional credit of $0.0001 per share if an LMM is
registered as the LMM in at least 75 but less than 100 Less Active ETP
Securities
 An additional credit of $0.00005 per share if an LMM is
registered as the LMM in at least 50 but less than 75 Less Active ETP
Securities

    The number of Less Active ETP Securities for the billing month is
based on the number of Less Active ETP Securities in which an LMM is
registered as the LMM on the average of the first and last business day
of the previous month.
    With this proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to amend the
percentage of Consolidated Tape B ADV requirement from 0.010% to
0.013%. The Exchange is not proposing any change to the CADV
requirement of less than 100,000 shares. Based on the Exchange's
calculation of Tape B CADV for the prior calendar quarter, i.e., from
January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2020, the proposed change would result in
an additional 40 Less Active ETP Securities that LMMs can register in
to qualify for the incremental credits. The increase in the number of
Less Active ETP Securities should benefit most, if not all, LMMs on the
Exchange.
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to encourage LMMs and
ETP Holders to enhance the market quality in Tape B securities that are
listed and traded on the Exchange and, given the recent volatility in
the equities markets, the Exchange believes that amending the
percentage threshold would qualify a greater number of Less Active ETP
Securities, and should therefore provide LMMs increased opportunities
to earn incremental credits. The Exchange believes the proposal would
also encourage competition in Tape B securities quoted and traded on
the Exchange. To illustrate, suppose an LMM is currently registered in
98 Less Active ETP Securities, and thus qualifies to earn an
incremental credit of $0.0001 per share. With this proposed rule
change, which would result in an additional 40 Less Active ETP
Securities that LMMs could register in as the LMM, the LMM in the above
example could choose to register in as little as 2 additional Less
Active ETP Securities, and by doing so, would then qualify for the tier
that provides an incremental rebate of $0.0002 per share because the
LMM would be registered in at least 100 Less Active Securities. The
Exchange believes the proposed rule change would provide greater
incentive to LMMs to add displayed liquidity in Less Active ETP
Securities as it would increase the number of eligible Less Active ETP
Securities that a LMM could register in as the LMM.
    The Exchange does not know how much order flow LMMs and ETP Holders
choose to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. The
incremental credits in NYSE Arca-listed securities are available to all
LMMs that are registered as the LMM in a security, and to ETP Holders
that are affiliated with a LMM. Currently, there is one LMM that
qualifies for the $0.0003 per share credit and one other LMM that
qualifies for the $0.0004 per share credit.\14\ Without having a view
of a LMM's activity on other markets and off-exchange venues, the
Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would
result in more LMMs sending their orders in NYSE Arca-listed securities
to the Exchange to qualify for the existing credits or whether this
proposed rule change would result in LMMs to send more of their orders
in NYSE Arca-listed securities to the Exchange to qualify for such
credits. The Exchange cannot predict with certainty how many LMMs would
avail themselves of this opportunity but additional liquidity-providing
orders would benefit all market participants because it would provide
greater execution opportunities on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ As of March 31, 2020, there are 18 registered LMMs on the
Exchange that could qualify for the incremental rebates for Less
Active ETP Securities, all of whom are affiliated with one or more
ETP holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems
that market participants would have in complying with the proposed
changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\15\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\16\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Fee Change Is Reasonable
    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented
and

competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Commission itself recognized, the market for trading
services in NMS stocks has become ``more fragmented and competitive.''
\18\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across 13
exchanges,\19\ numerous alternative trading systems,\20\ and broker-
dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order flow. As
noted above, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of equity order flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 84 FR 5202,
5253 (February 20, 2019) (File No. S7-05-18) (Final rule).
    \19\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S Equities Market Volume
Summary, available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
    \20\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable
order which provide liquidity on an Exchange, LMMs and ETP Holders can
choose from any one of the 13 currently operating registered exchanges
to route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces reasonably
constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to orders that would
provide displayed liquidity on an exchange. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
    Given this competitive environment, the proposal represents a
reasonable attempt to attract additional order flow to the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to amend the
percentage requirement to qualify for the incremental LMM credits is
reasonable because it is intended to continue to encourage LMMs, and
ETP Holders affiliated with such LMMs, to promote price discovery and
market quality in Less Active ETP Securities for the benefit of all
market participants. The Exchange believes that amending the threshold
from 0.010% of Consolidated Tape B ADV to 0.013% of Consolidated Tape B
ADV would qualify a greater number of Less Active ETP Securities, and
should therefore provide LMMs increased opportunities to earn
incremental credits. The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to
qualify for the current incremental credit for adding liquidity is also
reasonable because it would encourage liquidity and competition in all
securities quoted and traded on the Exchange. Moreover, the Exchange
believes that the proposed change could incentivize LMMs to register as
an LMM in Less Active ETP Securities and thus, add more liquidity in
all securities, and in particular Tape B securities, to the benefit of
all market participants.
    Submission of additional liquidity to the Exchange would promote
price discovery and transparency and enhance order execution
opportunities for LMMs from the substantial amounts of liquidity
present on the Exchange. All participants, including LMMs, would
benefit from the greater amounts of liquidity that would be present on
the Exchange, which would provide greater execution opportunities.
    On the backdrop of the competitive environment in which the
Exchange currently operates, the proposed rule change is a reasonable
attempt to increase liquidity on the Exchange and improve the
Exchange's market share relative to its competitors.
The Proposed Fee Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Fees and Credits
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to amend the
percentage of Consolidated Tape B ADV threshold to qualify for the
incremental LMM credits is equitable because it provides discounts that
are reasonably related to the value to the Exchange's market quality
associated with higher volumes. The Exchange further believes that,
given the recent volatility and high volumes in the equities markets,
amending the threshold from 0.010% of Consolidated Tape B ADV to 0.013%
of Consolidated Tape B ADV would qualify a greater number of Less
Active ETP Securities that LMMs could register in as a LMM, and should
therefore provide LMMs increased opportunities to earn incremental
credits, which would encourage greater displayed liquidity and improved
quoting.
The Proposed Fee Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not unfairly
discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, LMMs and ETP
Holders are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe
that alternatives offer them better value.
    The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to amend
the percentage of Consolidated Tape B ADV threshold to qualify for the
incremental LMM credits, as the amended requirements would apply on an
equal basis to all LMMs. Further, the Exchange believes that amending
the threshold from 0.010% of Consolidated Tape B ADV to 0.013% of
Consolidated Tape B ADV would qualify a greater number of Less Active
ETP Securities, and should therefore incentivize LMMs to send more
orders to the Exchange resulting in increased opportunities to earn
incremental credits. The Exchange also believes that the proposed
change is not unfairly discriminatory because it is reasonably related
to the value to the Exchange's market quality associated with higher
volume.
    The proposal to amend the percentage of Consolidated Tape B ADV
threshold to qualify for the incremental rebates neither targets nor
will it have a disparate impact on any particular category of market
participant. The proposal does not permit unfair discrimination because
the proposed threshold would be applied to all similarly situated LMMs,
who would all be eligible for the same credit on an equal basis.
Accordingly, no LMM already operating on the Exchange would be
disadvantaged by this allocation of fees.
    Finally, the submission of orders to the Exchange is optional for
LMMs and ETP Holders in that they could choose whether to submit orders
to the Exchange and, if they do, the extent of its activity in this
regard. The Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\21\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance

of the purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange
believes that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of
additional liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market
depth, price discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution
opportunities for LMMs and ETP Holders. As a result, the Exchange
believes that the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in
adopting Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among
orders, which promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks
for all types of orders, large and small.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 70 FR 37495,
37498-99 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
amended percentage of Consolidated Tape B ADV threshold to qualify for
the incremental credit applicable to LMMs, and ETP Holders affiliated
with such LMMs, would continue to incentivize market participants to
direct their displayed order flow to the Exchange. Greater liquidity
benefits all market participants on the Exchange by providing more
trading opportunities and encourages LMMs to send orders, thereby
contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which benefits all market
participants on the Exchange. The proposed rule change would be
applicable to all similarly-situated market participants, and, as such,
the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden on competition
among market participants on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily choose to
send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they
deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable. As noted
above, the Exchange's current market share of intraday trading (i.e.,
excluding auctions) is less than 12%. In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually adjust its fees and rebates to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with off-exchange venues. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in response,
and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing
practices, the Exchange does not believe its proposed fee change can
impose any burden on intermarket competition.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar order types and comparable
transaction pricing, by encouraging additional orders to be sent to the
Exchange for execution.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \23\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \24\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \25\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2020-28 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to: Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2020-28. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2020-28 and should be submitted
on or before May 6, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-07948 Filed 4-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 57 (Friday, March 26, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16171-16173]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06300]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2021-0177; FRL-10021-16-Region 6]

Air Plan Approval; Texas; Clean Air Act Requirements for
Emissions Inventories for Nonattainment Areas for the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted
by the State of Texas to meet the Emissions Inventory (EI) requirements
of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), for the Dallas-Fort
Worth (DFW), Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB), and Bexar County ozone
nonattainment areas for the 2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to approve this action
pursuant to section 110 and part D of the CAA and EPA's regulations.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 26, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2021-0177, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nevine Salem, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure and Ozone Section,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff,
the EPA Region 6 office will be closed to the public to reduce the risk
of transmitting COVID-19. We encourage the public to submit comments
via https://www.regulations.gov, as there will be a delay in processing
mail and no courier or hand deliveries will be accepted. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

I. Background

    Ozone is a gas that is formed by the reaction of Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOC) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) in the
atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. Therefore, an emission
inventory for ozone focuses on the emissions of VOC and NOX
referred to as ozone precursors. These precursors (VOC and
NOX) are emitted by many types of pollution sources,
including point sources such as power plants and industrial emissions
sources; on-road and off-road mobile sources (motor vehicles and
engines); and smaller residential and commercial sources, such as dry
cleaners, auto body shops, and household paints, collectively referred
to as nonpoint sources (also called area sources).

1. The 2015 Ozone NAAQS

    On October 1, 2015 the EPA revised both the primary and secondary
NAAQS \1\ for ozone from concentration

level of 0.075 part per million (ppm) to 0.070 ppm to provide increased
protection of public health and the environment (80 FR 65296, October
26, 2015). The 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS retains the same general form
and averaging time as the 0.075 ppm NAAQS set in 2008 (2008 8-hour
NAAQS) but is set at a more protective level. Specifically, the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to 0.07 ppm \2\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The primary ozone standards provide protection for children,
older adults, and people with asthma or other lung diseases, and
other at-risk populations against an array of adverse health effects
that include reduced lung function, increased respiratory symptoms
and pulmonary inflammation; effects that contribute to emergency
department visits or hospital admissions; and mortality. The
secondary ozone standards protect against adverse effects to the
public welfare, including those related to impacts on sensitive
vegetation and forested ecosystems.
    \2\ For a detailed explanation of the calculation of the 3-year
8-hour average, see 80 FR 65296 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix U.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 9, 2018 (83 FR 10376), the EPA published the
Classifications Rule that establishes how the statutory classifications
apply for the 2015 8-hr ozone NAAQS, including the air quality
thresholds for each classification category and attainment deadline
associated with each classification.
    On June 18, 2018, the EPA classified the DFW and HGB areas as
marginal nonattainment areas for 2015 ozone NAAQS with an attainment
deadline of August 3, 2021. (See 83 FR 25776). The DFW area consists of
Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Tarrant and
Wise counties. The HGB area consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend,
Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery counties. On July 25, 2018, Bexar
county was designated as marginal nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone
standard with an attainment deadline of September 24, 2021 (See 83 FR
35136).

2. Statutory and Regulatory Emission Inventory Requirements

    An emission inventory of ozone is an estimation of actual emissions
of air pollutants that contribute to the formation of ozone in an area.
The emissions inventory provides emissions data for a variety of air
quality planning tasks, including establishing baseline emission levels
for calculating emission reduction targets needed to attain the NAAQS,
determining emission inputs for ozone air quality modeling analyses,
and tracking emissions over time to determine progress toward meeting
Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirements.
    CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1315(b) require states to
submit a ``base year inventory'' for each ozone nonattainment area
within two years of the effective date of designation. This inventory
must be ``a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual
emissions from sources of VOC and NOX emitted within the
boundaries of the nonattainment area as required by CAA section
182(a)(1)'' (40 CFR 51.1300(p), see also CAA section 172(c)(3)). In
addition, 40 CFR 51.1310(b) requires that the inventory year be
selected consistent with the baseline year for the RFP plan, which is
usually the most recent calendar year for which a complete triennial
emissions inventory is required to be submitted to the EPA under the
Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AAER) (40 CFR part 51, subpart
A).

3. State's Submittal

    On June 10, 2020, Texas adopted a SIP revision addressing the 2015
ozone NAAQS emissions inventory requirements for the DFW, HGB and Bexar
County nonattainment areas, and submitted it to EPA on June 24,
2020.\3\ Texas has developed a 2017 base year emissions inventory for
the DFW, HGB, and Bexar county nonattainment areas. The 2017 base year
emissions include all point, nonpoint (area), non-road mobile, and on-
road mobile source emissions. Tables 1, 2, and 3 summarize the 2017
NOX and VOC emissions for these nonattainment areas for a
typical ozone season day emission \4\ (reflective of the summer period,
when the highest ozone concentrations are expected in these ozone
nonattainment areas).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A copy of the SIP revision is available online at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R06-OAR-2021-0177.
    \4\ See Ozone season day emission as defined in 40 CFR
51.1300(q).

                  Table 1--DFW 2017 Emissions Inventory
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Source type                        NOX        VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.............................................      29.90      21.04
Nonpoint (Area)...................................      41.82     293.62
On-road Mobile....................................      74.79      31.74
Non-road Mobile...................................     125.13      60.56
                                                   ---------------------
  Total...........................................     271.64     406.96
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Table 2--HGB 2017 Emissions Inventory
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Source type                        NOX        VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.............................................      97.31      73.34
Nonpoint (Area)...................................      32.12     287.74
On-road Mobile....................................      86.34      32.29
Non-road Mobile...................................     101.49      58.65
                                                   ---------------------
  Total...........................................     317.26     452.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Table 3--Bexar County 2017 Emissions Inventory
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Source type                        NOX        VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.............................................      29.88       3.56
Nonpoint (Area)...................................       6.62      74.61
On-road Mobile....................................      11.42       7.09
Non-road Mobile...................................      35.70      20.84
                                                   ---------------------
  Total...........................................      83.62     106.10
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Evaluation

    EPA has reviewed the Texas SIP revision for consistency with the
CAA and regulatory emission inventory requirements. In particular, EPA
has reviewed the techniques used by state of Texas to derive and
quality assure the emission estimates. EPA has also evaluated whether
Texas provided the public with the opportunity to review and comment on
the development of the emission estimates and whether Texas addressed
the public comments received. A summary of EPA's analysis is provided
below. For a full discussion for our evaluation, please see our
Technical Support Document (TSD) included in the docket to this action.
    Texas documented the general procedures used to estimate the
emissions for each of the four major source types as referenced above.
The documentation of the emission estimation procedures was adequate
for us to determine that Texas followed acceptable procedures to
estimate the emissions.
    Texas developed a quality assurance plan and followed this plan
during various phases of the emissions estimation and documentation
process to quality assure the emissions for completeness and accuracy.
These quality assurance procedures are summarized in the documentation
describing how the emissions totals were developed. We propose to find
that the quality assurance procedures followed by Texas are adequate
and acceptable and that Texas has developed inventories of VOC and
NOX emissions that are comprehensive and complete.
    Texas notified the public of the opportunity for comment and
offered three public hearings. A full record of public notices, written
and oral comments received during the state's public comment period, as
well as states' responses to those comments are included in the state's
submittal. A copy of the Texas SIP revision submittal is available
online at www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R06-OAR-2021-0177.

III. Proposed Action

    We are proposing to approve the portion of the Texas SIP revision
submitted on June 24, 2020 to address the emissions inventory
requirements for the DFW, HGB, and Bexar counties for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. The inventories we are proposing to approve are listed in Tables
1, 2, and 3 above. We are proposing to approve the emissions
inventories because they contain comprehensive, accurate and current
inventories of actual emissions for all relevant sources in accordance
with CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) requirements and because
Texas adopted the emission inventories consistent with reasonable
public notice and opportunity for a public hearing requirements. A TSD
was prepared which details our evaluation. Our TSD may be accessed
online at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA- R06-OAR-2021-0177.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve 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 proposed 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: March 22, 2021.
David Gray,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2021-06300 Filed 3-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 36 (Friday, February 24, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11505]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03544]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9265; Airspace Docket No. 16-ANM-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-235 and V-293 in the Vicinity
of Cedar City, Utah

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the preamble to a final rule published in
the Federal Register of December 6, 2016, amending two Air Traffic
Service Routes (ATS) in the vicinity of Cedar City, Utah. The three
letter identifier for the renamed Enoch VOR/DME navigation aid is
changed from (ENK) to (EHK).

DATES: The effective date of this final rule remains 0901 UTC, March 2,
2017. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation
by reference under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51,
subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of
conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Ready, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the final rule FR Doc. 2016-29143, beginning on page 87802, in
the issue of December 6, 2016, make the following correction, in ``The
Rule'' section: On page 87802, column 3, line 61, remove ``(ENK)'' and
add in its place ``(EHK)''.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 8, 2017.
Leslie M. Swann,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2017-03544 Filed 2-23-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P