[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 84 (Thursday, April 30, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23925-23929]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09009]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0009; Project Identifier MCAI-2019-00111-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Rolls-Royce plc) Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede airworthiness directive (AD)
2018-08-02 which applies to all Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
(RRD) Trent 1000-A2, Trent 1000-AE2, Trent 1000-C2, Trent 1000-CE2,
Trent 1000-D2, Trent 1000-E2, Trent 1000-G2, Trent 1000-H2, Trent 1000-
J2, Trent 1000-K2, and Trent 1000-L2 model turbofan engines. AD 2018-
08-02 requires initial and repetitive ultrasonic or visual inspections
of the intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) stage 1 rotor blades, IPC
stage 2 rotor blades, and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail posts, and removal
of any cracked parts from service. Since the FAA issued AD 2018-08-02,
the manufacturer identified cracking of parts in-service resulting in
the need to require new inspections using new inspection thresholds and
intervals. This proposed AD would require new inspections based on
updated inspection thresholds and intervals for these IPC parts. This
AD would also add an optional terminating action, amend the asymmetric
power condition for engine inspection, and require an inspection after
a cabin depressurization event. The FAA is proposing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Rolls-
Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, 15827 Blankenfelde-Mahlow,
Germany; phone: +49 (0) 33 708 6 0; email: https://www.rolls-royce.com/contact-us.aspx. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. 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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0009; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI),
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Elwin, Aerospace Engineer, ECO
Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-
238-7236; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0009;
Project Identifier MCAI-2019-00111-E'' at the beginning of your
comments. The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM.
The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this NPRM because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information as described in the
following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page
of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat
such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will
not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing
CBI should be sent to Stephen Elwin, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch,
FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that
the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2018-08-02, Amendment 39-19255 (83 FR 17746,
April 24, 2018), (``AD 2018-08-02''), for all RRD Trent 1000-A2, Trent
1000-AE2, Trent 1000-C2, Trent 1000-CE2, Trent 1000-D2, Trent 1000-E2,
Trent 1000-G2, Trent 1000-H2, Trent 1000-J2, Trent 1000-K2, and Trent
1000-L2 model turbofan engines. AD 2018-08-02 requires initial and
repetitive ultrasonic and visual inspections of the IPC stage 1 rotor
blades, IPC stage 2 rotor blades, and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail posts,
and removal of any cracked parts from service. AD 2018-08-02 resulted
from IPC blade separations resulting in engine failures. The FAA issued
AD 2018-08-02 to prevent failure of the IPC.

Actions Since AD 2018-08-02 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2018-08-02, The European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member
States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD 2019-0250, dated
October 9, 2019 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to address
the unsafe condition on these products. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported on Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 `Pack C'
engines, where some IPC Rotor 1 and Rotor 2 blades were found
cracked.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to in-
flight blade release, possibly resulting in reduced control of the
aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Rolls-Royce
initially issued Alert NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AJ814 and 72-AJ819 to
provide inspection instructions for IPC Rotor 1 blades, and IPC
Rotor 2 blades and IPC shaft Stage 2 dovetail posts, respectively.
Rolls-Royce also issued NMSB TRENT 1000 72-J871 to provide rework
instructions for the affected parts, and Alert NMSB TRENT 1000 72-
AJ869 to inspect those post-rework parts. Consequently, EASA issued
AD 2017-0248 to require repetitive inspections of the affected IPC
Rotor blades and IPC shaft Stage 2 dovetail posts and, depending on
findings, removal from service of the engine for corrective action.
    After that [EASA] AD was issued, Rolls-Royce issued Alert NMSB
TRENT 1000 72-AK058 to provide instructions for a one-time on-wing
inspection. Consequently, EASA

issued AD 2018-0073, retaining the requirements of EASA AD 2017-
0248, which was superseded, to require an additional borescope
inspection of certain engines and, depending on findings, removal
from service of the engine for corrective action.
    After that [EASA] AD was issued, it was determined that
repetitive borescope inspections are necessary on all engines to
ensure fleet-wide continued safe operation. Consequently, Rolls-
Royce revised Alert NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AJ869, Alert NMSB TRENT 1000
72-AJ814, Alert NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AJ819 and NMSB TRENT 1000 72-
J871, and issued NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AK060 to consolidate all
inspection instructions. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2018-0084
(later revised), retaining the requirements of EASA AD 2018-0073,
which was superseded, and requiring repetitive on-wing borescope
inspections of the affected Rotor 1 parts and affected Rotor 2 parts
and, depending on findings, removal from service of the engine for
corrective action. That [EASA] AD also introduced specific
requirements for engines installed on aeroplanes involved in ETOPS,
and inspection following operation in asymmetric power conditions.
    Rolls-Royce then introduced NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK092 to provide
inspections for the rear face of the Rotor 2 blades and NMSB TRENT
1000 72-AK060 was revised (R1) accordingly. Later, Rolls-Royce
developed mod 72-J941, installing improved IPC Stage 1 and Stage 2
rotor blades, and issued the modification SB, providing the
necessary instructions for in-service application. EASA issued AD
2018-0084R2 to exclude post-mod 72-J941 engines from the
Applicability and introducing the modification SB as terminating
action for the repetitive inspections as required by that [EASA] AD.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Rolls-Royce issued the NMSB and
revised Alert NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AJ814, 72-AJ819 and 72-AK092 to
introduce new inspections, new thresholds and new intervals,
depending on engine configuration. These inspections are now
applicable for all operations, ETOPS and non-ETOPS. The latest
revision of the NMSB also amended the asymmetric power conditions
for engine inspection and introduced cabin depressurisation as an
event to trigger engine inspection(s).
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires
introduction of the new inspections, replacing those previously
imposed by EASA AD 2018-0084R2 (through NMSB TRENT 1000 72-AK060),
and removes the references to Engine Health Monitoring messages and
ETOPS-related requirements.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0009.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Rolls-Royce plc (RR) Alert Non-Modification
Service Bulletin (NMSB) Trent 1000 72-AK313, Revision 1, dated August
22, 2019; and RR Service Bulletin (SB) Trent 1000 72-J941, Revision 1,
dated February 6, 2019, and Initial Issue, dated December 6, 2018. RR
Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313 defines the initial inspection threshold
and repeat inspection intervals for Trent 1000 IPC stage 1 blade, stage
2 blade, and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail posts. RR SB Trent 1000 72-J941
describes procedures for modifying the engine by installing the
redesigned IPC stage 1 and stage 2 rotor blades. This service
information is reasonably available because the interested parties have
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AJ819, Revision 4,
dated May 3, 2019; RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AJ814, Revision 5, dated
May 3, 2019; and RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK092, Revision 4, dated
May 3, 2019. RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AJ819 describes procedures for
performing a visual borescope inspection of the IPC stage 2 rotor
blades and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail posts. RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000
72-AJ814 describes procedures for performing an ultrasonic inspection
(USI) of the IPC stage 1 rotor blades. RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-
AK092 describes procedures for performing a USI of the IPC stage 2
rotor blades.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2018-08-
02. This proposed AD would require initial and repetitive ultrasonic or
visual inspections, of the IPC stage 1 blade root (front face), IPC
stage 2 blade root (front and rear face), and IPC shaft stage 2
dovetail post (front face), and removal of any cracked parts from
service. This AD would also require an inspection after asymmetric
power and cabin depressurization events.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 7 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect the IPC stage 1 blade root      20 work-hours x $85 per               $0          $1,700         $11,900
 (Front Face).                           hour = $1,700.
Inspect the IPC stage 2 blade root      6 work-hours x $85 per                 0             510           3,570
 (Front Face) and IPC shaft stage 2      hour = $510.
 dovetail post (Front Face).
Inspect the IPC stage 2 blade root      10 work-hours x $85 per                0             850           5,950
 (Rear Face).                            hour = $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
engines that might need these replacements.

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace all 34 R1 Blades......................  280 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $52,360         $76,160
                                                 $23,800.

Replace all 49 R2 Blades......................  280 work-hours x $85 per hour =           48,755          72,555
                                                 $23,800.
Replace IPC Drum..............................  144 work-hours x $85 per hour =        1,370,000       1,382,240
                                                 $12,240.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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)
2018-08-02, Amendment 39-19255 (83 FR 17746, April 24, 2018), and
adding the following new AD:

Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (Type Certificate previously
held by Rolls-Royce plc): Docket No. FAA-2020-0009; Project
Identifier MCAI-2019-00111-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 15,
2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-08-02, Amendment 39-19255 (83 FR 17746,
April 24, 2018).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (Type
Certificate previously held by Rolls-Royce plc) Trent 1000-A2, Trent
1000-AE2, Trent 1000-C2, Trent 1000-CE2, Trent 1000-D2, Trent 1000-
E2, Trent 1000-G2, Trent 1000-H2, Trent 1000-J2, Trent 1000-K2, and
Trent 1000-L2 model turbofan engines, except those that have the
redesigned intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) stage 1 and stage
2 rotor blades introduced by Rolls-Royce plc (RR) Service Bulletin
(SB) Trent 1000 72-J941, Revision 1, dated February 6, 2019.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by IPC blade separations resulting in
engine failures. Subsequently, the manufacturer identified cracking
of parts in-service resulting in the need to require new inspections
using new inspection thresholds and intervals. The manufacturer also
determined the need to add an optional terminating action, amend the
asymmetric power condition for engine inspection, and require an
inspection after a cabin depressurization event. The FAA is issuing
this AD to prevent failure of the IPC. The unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in failure of one or more engines, loss of
thrust control, and loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) After the effective date of this AD, before exceeding the
initial inspection thresholds and repeat inspection intervals
specified in Table 1 of RR Alert Non-Modification Service Bulletin
(NMSB) Trent 1000 72-AK313, Revision 1, dated August 22, 2019 (``RR
NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, R1''):
    (i) Perform initial ultrasonic inspections (USIs) of the IPC
stage 1 blade root (front face).
    (ii) Thereafter, perform repetitive USIs of the IPC stage 1
blade root (front face).
    (iii) Use the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.A.(1)(a)
(on-wing) or 3.A.(2)(a) and (b) (in-shop) of RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-
AK313, R1 to perform the inspections.
    (2) After the effective date of this AD, before exceeding the
initial inspection thresholds and repeat inspection intervals
specified in Table 2 of RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, R1:
    (i) Perform initial visual inspections of the IPC stage 2 blade
root (front face) and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail post (front face).
    (ii) Thereafter, perform repetitive visual inspections of the
IPC stage 2 blade root (front face) and IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail
post (front face).
    (iii) Use the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B.(1)(a)
(on-wing) or 3.B.(2)(b) (in-shop) of RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, R1
to perform the inspections.
    (3) After the effective date of this AD, before exceeding the
initial inspection threshold and repeat inspection intervals
specified in Table 2 of RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, R1:
    (i) Perform initial USIs of IPC stage 2 blade root (rear face).
    (ii) Thereafter, perform repetitive USIs of IPC stage 2 blade
root (rear face).
    (iii) Use the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.C.(1)(a)
(on-wing) or 3.C.(2)(a) (in-shop) of RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, R1
to perform the inspections.
    (4) After the effective date of this AD, within 5 engine flight
cycles (FCs) after each occurrence in which any engine operates in
asymmetric power conditions at an altitude of less than 28,000 feet,
perform the following inspections on the engine not affected by the
power reduction or in-flight shutdown (IFSD):
    (i) Perform initial USIs and visual inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (2), and (3) of this AD.
    (ii) Thereafter, perform the repetitive USIs and visual
inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1), (2), and (3) of this AD.

    (iii) Use the service information and repetitive inspection
thresholds required by paragraphs (g)(1)(iii), (2)(iii), and
(3)(iii) to perform the inspections, as applicable.
    (5) After the effective date of this AD, within 5 engine FCs
following a cabin depressurization event, perform the following
inspections on both engines installed on the airplane:
    (i) Perform initial USIs and visual inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (2), and (3) of this AD.
    (ii) Thereafter, perform the repetitive USIs and visual
inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1), (2), and (3) of this AD.
    (iii) Use the service information and repetitive inspection
thresholds required by paragraphs (g)(1)(iii), (2)(iii), and
(3)(iii) to perform the inspections, as applicable.
    (6) If any IPC stage 1 blade root (front face), IPC stage 2
blade root (front face), IPC shaft stage 2 dovetail post (front
face), or IPC stage 2 blade root (rear face) is found cracked during
any inspection required by this AD, replace the part with a part
eligible for installation before further flight.

(h) Terminating Action (Optional)

    Modification of an engine by installing the redesigned IPC stage
1 and stage 2 rotor blades, using RR SB Trent 1000 72-J941, Revision
1, dated February 6, 2019, or Initial Issue, dated December 6, 2018,
is the terminating action for the initial and repetitive ultrasonic
or visual inspection requirements, as applicable, of paragraph
(g)(1) through (5) of this AD for that engine.

(i) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, an ``asymmetric power condition'' is
the operation of the airplane at an altitude of less than 28,000
feet, experiencing either single engine take-off, engine fault
(reduced power on one engine), or single engine IFSD, which includes
execution of any non-normal checklist procedure.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    You may take credit for the initial inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this AD if you performed these
inspections before the effective date of this AD using any of the
following.
    (1) RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AJ819, Revision 3, dated April
13, 2018, or earlier revisions;
    (2) RR NMSB Trent 1000 72-AJ814, Revision 4, dated September 28,
2018, or earlier revisions;
    (3) RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK313, Initial Issue, dated May
2, 2019; or
    (4) RR Alert NMSB Trent 1000 72-AK092, Revision 3, dated
February 28, 2019 or earlier revisions.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and
Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199), are subject to the requirements of paragraph (k)(1) of
this AD.
    (1) Operators who are prohibited from further flight due to a
crack finding as a result of paragraph (g) of this AD, may perform a
one-time non-revenue ferry flight to a location where the engine can
be removed from service. This ferry flight must be performed without
passengers, involve non-ETOPS operation, and consume no more than
three FCs.
    (2) [Reserved]

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO Branch, 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
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. You may email your
request 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.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Stephen Elwin,
Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2019-0250, dated October 9, 2019, for more information. You may
examine the EASA AD in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No.
FAA-2020-0009.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd. & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, 15827
Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; phone: +49 (0) 33 708 6 0; email:
https://www.rolls-royce.com/contact-us.aspx. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA, 01803. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on April 23, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-09009 Filed 4-29-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 144)]
[Notices]
[Page 42706]
[DOCID:fr27jy06-94]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54190; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1
Thereto Relating To Reducing Staffing Requirements for Options
Specialist Units

July 21, 2006.
    On May 4, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend Phlx Rule 501(d) to reduce the mandatory
staffing requirement to be approved as an options or foreign currency
options specialist unit and to retain such status, while continuing to
enable the Exchange's Options Allocation, Evaluation and Securities
Committee (``Options Allocation Committee'') to require a unit to
obtain additional staffing. On June 6, 2006, Phlx filed Amendment No. 1
to the proposed rule change.\3\ The proposed rule change, as amended,
was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 20, 2006.\4\
The Commission received no comments regarding the proposal, as amended.
This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified the rationale for
reducing staffing for foreign currency options and made non-
substantive changes to the proposed rule change.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53979 (June 14,
2006), 71 FR 35475 (the ``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Phlx Rule 501(d) requires that to be approved as an
options or foreign currency options specialist unit and retain such
status, the specialist unit must have at each quarter turret or trading
post one head specialist, two assistant specialists (at least one of
whom must be associated with the specialist unit), and one specialist
clerk.\5\ However, as the Exchange and member organizations continue to
enhance options trading technology and options orders are now
automatically executed on the Exchange over 90% of the time, the
Exchange believes that the need to maintain the present required
staffing levels for every specialist unit is significantly reduced. The
Exchange believes that, in light of such technological advances, and in
conjunction with requests from specialist units for greater staffing
flexibility, requiring only one assistant specialist and eliminating
the requirement for a specialist clerk is warranted.\6\ Furthermore,
the Phlx believes that the number of foreign currency option orders
executed on the Exchange does not warrant the continued level of
staffing.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange is also proposing to make non-substantive
changes to Phlx Rule 501(d) such as deletion of obsolete references
to quarter turrets, which are no longer used on the floor.
    \6\ The changes proposed in Phlx Rule 501(d) herein are not
intended to alter other specialist unit obligations established by
Phlx rules.
    \7\ In the Notice, the Exchange represented that in 2005, the
number of foreign currency options orders executed on the Exchange
was less than one percent of the overall number of option orders
executed on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\8\
In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal, as amended,
is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires that the
rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and to protect investors and the public interest.
Specifically, the proposed rule change, as amended, should provide
flexibility in options and foreign currency options specialist unit
staffing by reducing the mandatory staffing requirement. At the same
time, Phlx Rule 501(d) will continue to provide the Options Allocation
Committee with the ability to require a specialist unit to obtain
additional staffing depending upon the number of assigned options
classes and associated order flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In approving this proposed rule change, as amended, the
Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2006-30), as amended, is
hereby approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-12002 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


Customer Project name Location Year Location Type Scope of Supply Capacity m3/ h Screen Type Qty Slot ( mm) Material ABS Primagaz Heating water Lavena 97 Sea T36 2 5 CuNi Y 1400 Sidem Desalting E A U 94 Sea T36 2 3 CuNi Y 2300 Sidem Desalting E A U 95 Sea T48 3 3 CuNi Y 7000 Sidem Desalting E A U 97 Sea T48 2 3 CuNi Y 3600 Ingersoll Fire extingbishLybia 99 Sea T18 3 3 CuNi Y 825 TPL Roma Potable water Sicily 90 Sea T27 1 2 CuNi Y 550 EDP Portugal Cooling circuit Lisbonne 96 Sea T54 3 3 CuNi Y 2500 F W Portugal Cooling circuit Lisbonne 98 Sea T42 16 3 CuNi Y 7300 GEC Alsthom Connah's Quay Deeside Estuary T21 28 3 CuNi Y Kelco International Ladybird Works Kelso Sea T16 1 3 CuNi N 252 NEI ABB Power Plants Deeside Power Station Deeside Estuary T36 1 2 CuNi Y 900 Johnson Screens European Salt Water Z Alloy Installations


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 167 (Friday, August 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 52359]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21309]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2015-53]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; American
Airlines, Inc.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before September 17, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-3491
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keira Jones<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 25, 2015.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition For Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2015-3491
    Petitioner: American Airlines, Inc.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  93.123
    Description of Relief Sought: American Airlines seeks relief to
permit American/American Eagle to operate two slots to maintain nonstop
service between Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) and
Lansing, Michigan's Capital Region International Airport (LAN) under
the terms and conditions of Exemption No. 10466.

[FR Doc. 2015-21309 Filed 8-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 60427]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24347]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Project No. 13488-001]

 FFP Project 78 LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On September 4, 2012, FFP Project 78, LLC filed an application for
a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a hydropower project
located on the Mississippi River, near Richardson, in Tipton County,
Tennessee, and Mississippi County, Arkansas. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed Island 35 Bend hydrokinetic project would consist of
the following: (1) Up to 1,070 SmarTurbine generating units installed
in arrays on the bottom of the river; (2) the total capacity of the
installation would be up to 74,960 kilowatts; (3) flexible cables would
convey each arrays power to a metering station; and (4) a transmission
line would interconnect with the power grid. The proposed project would
have an average annual generation of 170,476,000 kilowatt-hours, which
would be sold to a local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Ramya Swaminathan, Free Flow Power Corporation,
239 Causeway Street, Boston, MA 02114; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13488) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: September 27, 2012.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-24347 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 52 (Friday, March 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14908-14909]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05748]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9055-7]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) Filed March 8,
2021 10 a.m. EST Through March 15, 2021 10 a.m. EST Pursuant to 40 CFR
1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20210030, Final, USAF, SD, B-21 Main Operating Base 1 (MOB 1)
Beddown at Dyess AFB, Texas or Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota, Review
Period Ends: 04/19/2021, Contact: Julianne Turko<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210031, Final, FAA, NY, LaGuardia Access Improvement Program,
Review Period Ends: 04/19/2021, Contact: Andrew Brooks<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210032, Final, NMFS, CA, ADOPTION--Placer County Conservation
Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report, Contact: Neal McIntosh<PHONE_NUMBER>. The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) has adopted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) Final EIS No. 20200107, filed 5/14/2020 with EPA. NMFS was a
cooperating agency on this project. Therefore, republication of the
document is not necessary under Section 1506.3(b)(2) of the CEQ
regulations.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20210003, Draft, BLM, CA, WITHDRAWN--Desert Plan Amendment
Draft Land Use Plan Amendment and Draft Environmental Impact Statement,
Contact: Jeremiah Karuzas<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published
01/15/2021; Officially Withdrawn per request of the submitting agency.
EIS No. 20210010, Draft, FRA, MD, Draft Environmental Impact Statement
and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation Baltimore-Washington Superconducting
MAGLEV Project, Comment Period Ends: 05/24/2021,

Contact: Brandon Bratcher<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published
01/22/2021; Extending the Comment Period from 04/22/2021 to 05/24/2021.

    Dated: March 15, 2021.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2021-05748 Filed 3-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64603-64605]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22475]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90100; File No. SR-OCC-2020-010]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Concerning the Commingling of
Certain Non-Customer Margin Assets With Clearing Fund Contributions in
the Options Clearing Corporation's Account at the Federal Reserve Bank
of Chicago

October 6, 2020.

I. Introduction

    On August 7, 2020, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2020-010 (``Proposed Rule Change'')
pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder to provide OCC
with express authority to hold cash Clearing Fund contributions and
certain non-customer cash margin assets in its account at the Federal
Reserve Bank of Chicago at the same time.\3\ The Proposed Rule Change
was published for public comment in the Federal Register on August 24,
2020.\4\ The Commission has received no comments regarding the Proposed
Rule Change. This order approves the Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Notice of Filing infra note 4, 85 FR at 52176.
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89590 (Aug. 18, 2020),
85 FR 52176 (Aug. 24, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-010) (``Notice of
Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    Since March 15, 2016, OCC has maintained an account at the Federal
Reserve Bank of Chicago to hold cash deposits from its Clearing Members
to satisfy margin and Clearing Fund requirements.\5\ OCC's current
rules restrict the manner in which OCC may hold Clearing Fund
contributions and margin assets.\6\ As a result, OCC holds cash
Clearing Fund contributions in its Federal Reserve Bank Account, but
separately holds Clearing Members' cash margin assets in accounts with
commercial banks. To authorize OCC to comingle certain cash margin and
cash Clearing Fund contributions, OCC proposes to amend its Rules 604
and 1002 as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago authorization to provide
accounts and services to Options Clearing Corporation and Chicago
Mercantile Exchange, Inc., in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act and
Regulation HH, approved March 15, 2016 (https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h2/20160319/h2.pdf).
    \6\ See OCC Rules at https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/9d3854cd-b782-450f-bcf7-33169b0576ce/occ_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current rules. OCC Rule 604(d) requires that certain cash margin
assets of Clearing Members (``Specified Cash Margin Assets'') must be
deposited to the credit of OCC in an account or accounts,\7\ designated
as Clearing Member margin accounts, with such banks, trust companies or
other depositories as the Board of Directors may select. Rule 604(d)
further prohibits OCC from commingling Specified Cash Margin Assets
with OCC's funds of OCC or using such assets as working capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ OCC Rule 604(d) expressly excludes from these Specified Cash
Margin Assets those funds that are: (i) Deposited in respect of a
segregated futures account (which must be held in accordance with
the provisions of Section 4d of the Commodity Exchange Act and
regulations thereunder); (ii) invested by OCC pursuant to Rule
604(a); or (iii) credited by OCC to a liquidating settlement account
pursuant to Chapter XI of OCC's Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC Rule 1002(c) requires, among other things, that cash Clearing
Fund contributions not otherwise invested shall be deposited by OCC in
accounts with approved custodians, which include the Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago. Rule 1002(c) permits the comingling of Clearing Fund
contributions from different Clearing Members.\8\ OCC currently holds
cash Clearing Fund contributions in its Federal Reserve Bank Account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See OCC Rule 1002(c) available at https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/9d3854cd-b782-450f-bcf7-33169b0576ce/occ_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule Change to OCC. OCC proposes to add language to Rule
604 to allow OCC to deposit Specified Cash Margin Assets in a Federal
Reserve Bank Account not designated as a Clearing Member margin
account. The proposed change would apply only to non-customer margin
assets.\9\ OCC proposes further to add language to its Rules 604 and
1002 to allow OCC to commingle such assets and cash Clearing Fund
contributions deposited in a Federal Reserve Bank Account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 52177 (stating that OCC
proposes to add Interpretation and Policy .18 to Rule 604 to provide
that, notwithstanding anything else in Rule 604, Specified Cash
Margin Assets held by OCC as non-customer margin assets and
deposited to the credit of OCC in its Federal Reserve Bank Account
may be deposited in accounts that are not designated as Clearing
Member margin accounts and may be commingled with cash Clearing Fund
contributions.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that

such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to
such organization.\10\ After carefully considering the Proposed Rule
Change, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to OCC. More specifically, the Commission finds
that the proposal is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Exchange Act,\11\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii) and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16)
thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(e)(16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires, among other
things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible.\13\
Based on its review of the record, and for the reasons described below,
the Commission believes that allowing OCC to deposit non-customer
margin in its Federal Reserve Bank Account commingled with cash
Clearing Fund contributions as described above is consistent with the
safeguarding of securities and funds for which it has custody or
control over.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Proposed Rule Change would allow OCC to deposit non-customer
cash margin at a Federal Reserve Bank Account. The Commission continues
to believe that access to a Federal Reserve Account is a valuable
tool,\14\ and that the use of such a tool would reduce custody risk in
a clearing agency.\15\ Further, the Proposed Rule Change would not
limit OCC's access to commercial banks, and would, therefore, provide
OCC with an additional custodian at which to deposit non-customer cash
margin. The Commission believes, therefore, that adopting rules
allowing OCC to deposit non-customer cash margin in a Federal Reserve
Bank Account is consistent with the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 71699, 79 FR 29508,
29533 (May 22, 2014) (File No. S7-03-14).
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 68080, 77 FR 66220,
66268 (Nov. 2, 2012) (File No. S7-08-11).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii) under the Exchange Act requires that a
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively
measure, monitor, and manage the liquidity risk that arises in or is
borne by the covered clearing agency, including measuring, monitoring,
and managing its settlement and funding flows on an ongoing and timely
basis, and its use of intraday liquidity by, inter alia, using access
to accounts and services at a Federal Reserve Bank, or other relevant
central bank, when available and where determined to be practical by
the board of directors to enhance its management of liquidity risk.\17\
In recognizing that there may be a number of ways to address compliance
with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7), the Commission has stated that a covered
clearing agency generally should consider, when establishing and
maintaining policies and procedures that address liquidity risk,
including if the covered clearing agency has access to central bank
accounts, payment services, or securities services, whether it uses
these services, where practical, to enhance its management of liquidity
risk.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii).
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 78961, 81 FR 70786,
70823-24 (Oct. 13, 2016) (File No. S7-03-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC may use cash margin deposits, including non-customer cash
margin deposits, to manage liquidity risk. OCC recently adopted a the
Liquidity Risk Management Framework document (``LRMF'') that sets forth
a comprehensive overview of OCC's liquidity risk management practices
and governs OCC's policies and procedures as they relate to liquidity
risk management.\19\ The LRMF describes the primary liquidity risks OCC
faces when managing a Clearing Member default, and describes the
maintenance of liquidity resources designed to address a variety of
stress scenarios through the sizing of such resources.\20\ The LRMF
defines such liquidity resources to include cash margin deposits where
such deposits are required under OCC's Contingency Funding Plan.\21\
The Proposed Rule Change would permit, but not require, OCC to use its
access to a central bank account as a depository for non-customer cash
margin. The Commission believes, therefore, that allowing OCC to
deposit non-customer cash margin in a Federal Reserve Bank Account is
consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iii) under the
Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 89014 (Jun. 4, 2020),
85 FR 35446 (Jun. 10, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-003) (``LRMF
Approval Order'').
    \20\ See LRMF Approval Order, 85 FR at 35447.
    \21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) requires a clearing agency to establish,
implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to safeguard its own and its Clearing Members'
assets, minimize the risk of loss and delay in access to these assets,
and invest such assets in instruments with minimal credit, market, and
liquidity risks.\22\ The Proposed Rule Change would expand OCC's
ability to use its Federal Reserve Bank Account by allowing it to
deposit non-customer cash margin provided by Clearing Members in the
same account used to custody cash Clearing Fund contributions. As
stated above, the Commission believes that access to a Federal Reserve
Account is a valuable tool,\23\ and that the use of such a tool would
reduce custody risk in a clearing agency.\24\ OCC deposits cash
Clearing Fund contributions in its Federal Reserve Bank Account, but is
precluded from depositing margin in the same account under its current
rules. The Commission believes, therefore, that expanding the Clearing
Member funds that OCC may custody in its Federal Reserve Bank Account
to include non-customer cash margin is consistent with the requirements
of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) under the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 71699, 79 FR 29508,
29533 (May 22, 2014) (File No. S7-03-14).
    \24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 68080, 77 FR 66220,
66268 (Nov. 2, 2012) (File No. S7-08-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act, and in particular, the requirements of Section 17A of the
Exchange Act \25\ and the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ In approving this Proposed Rule Change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\26\ that the Proposed Rule Change (SR-OCC-2020-010) be,
and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-22475 Filed 10-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 16901]
[DOCID:fr02ap10-142]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee--Open Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
Open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of the
meetings of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
(COMSTAC). The meetings will take place on Tuesday and Wednesday, May
18 and 19, 2010, starting at 8 a.m. at the National Housing Center,
1201 15th Street NW., Washington, DC 20005.
    The proposed agenda for these meetings will feature discussions on:

--The impact of the President's proposed budget on commercial space
transportation;
--The issues the working groups propose to address; and
--The proposed by-laws for the COMSTAC.

There will also be briefings on the 2010 Commercial Space
Transportation Market Forecasts and discussions and activity reports by
the chairpersons of the COMSTAC working groups.
    Interested members of the public may submit relevant written
statements for the COMSTAC members to consider under the advisory
process. Statements may concern the issues and agenda items mentioned
above or additional issues that may be relevant for the U.S. commercial
space transportation industry. Interested parties wishing to submit
written statements should contact Susan Lender, DFO, (the Contact
Person listed below) in writing (mail or e-mail) by April 30,2010, so
that the information can be made available to COMSTAC members for their
review and consideration prior to the May 18 and 19, 2010, meetings.
Written statements should be supplied in the following formats: One
hard copy with original signature or one electronic copy via e-mail.
    Subject to approval, a portion of the May 19th meeting will be
closed to the public (starting at 3:45 p.m.).
    An agenda will be posted on the FAA Web site at http://www.faa.gov/
go/ast. For specific information concerning the times and locations of
the COMSTAC working group meetings, contact the Contact Person listed
below.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should
inform the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lender (AST-100), Office of
Commercial Space Transportation (AST), 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Room 331, Washington, DC 20591, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; E-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Complete information regarding COMSTAC is
available on the FAA website at: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/
headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, March 25, 2010.
George C. Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2010-7399 Filed 4-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 230 (Tuesday, December 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75097-75099]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30493]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0753; FRL-9939-57-OW]

Request for Scientific Views on the Draft Recommended Aquatic
Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Cadmium--2015

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing its
draft recommended aquatic life water quality criteria for cadmium for
public comment. EPA is updating its national recommended ambient water
quality criteria for cadmium in order to reflect the latest scientific
information, and current EPA policies and methods. Following closure of
this public comment period, EPA will consider scientific views from the
public on this draft document as well as any new data or information
received. EPA will then publish a Federal Register notice announcing
the availability of the final cadmium criteria. Once finalized, EPA's
water quality criteria for cadmium will provide recommendations to
states and tribes authorized to establish water quality standards under
the Clean Water Act. In adopting water quality standards, states set
exposure protections for aquatic life; chronic exposure to cadmium
negatively impacts growth, development, behavior, reproduction, and
immune and endocrine systems in aquatic life.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 1, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2015-0753, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. 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. 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, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Elias, Health and Ecological
Criteria Division, Office of Water (Mail Code 4304T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    1. Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0753
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone
number for the EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0753 Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit EPA Docket
Center

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

II. What are EPA's recommended water quality criteria?

    EPA's recommended water quality criteria are scientifically derived
numeric values that protect aquatic life or human health from the
deleterious effects of pollutants in ambient water. Section 304(a)(1)
of the Clean Water Act (CWA) directs EPA to develop and publish and,
from time to time, revise criteria for protection of aquatic life and
human health that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge.
Water quality criteria developed under section 304(a) are based solely
on data and the latest scientific knowledge on the relationship between
pollutant concentrations and environmental and human health effects.
Section 304(a) criteria do not reflect consideration of economic
impacts or the technological feasibility of meeting pollutant
concentrations in ambient water.
    EPA's recommended section 304(a) criteria provide technical
information to states and authorized tribes in adopting water quality
standards (WQS) that ultimately provide a basis for assessing water
body health and controlling discharges or releases of pollutants. Under
the CWA and its implementing regulations, states and authorized tribes
are to adopt water quality criteria to protect designated uses (e.g.,
public water supply, aquatic life, recreational use, or industrial
use). EPA's recommended water quality criteria do not substitute for
the CWA or regulations, nor are they regulations themselves. EPA's
recommended criteria do not impose legally binding requirements. States
and authorized tribes have the discretion to adopt, where appropriate,
other scientifically defensible water quality criteria that differ from
these recommendations.

III. What is cadmium and why is EPA concerned about it?

    Cadmium is a relatively rare, naturally occurring metal found in
mineral deposits and distributed ubiquitously at low concentrations in
the environment. Cadmium's primary industrial uses are for the
manufacturing of batteries, pigments, plastic stabilizers, metal
coatings, alloys and electronics. Recently, cadmium has been used in
manufacturing nanoparticles (quantum dots) for use in solar cells and
color displays. Cadmium is a non-essential metal with no biological
function in aquatic life. Chronic exposure leads to adverse effects on
growth, reproduction, immune and endocrine systems, development and
behavior in aquatic organisms.

IV. Information on the Draft Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality
Criteria for Cadmium

    EPA prepared an update of the chronic aquatic life criteria
document for cadmium based on the latest scientific information and
current EPA policies and methods, including EPA's Guidelines for
Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the Protection
of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses (1985) (EPA/R-85-100) and
Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment (1998) (EPA/630/R-95/002F).
The draft 2015 updated criteria include new data for 70 species and 49
genera not previously represented. The draft freshwater acute criterion
was derived to be protective of endangered species and further lowered
to protect the commercially and recreationally important rainbow trout,
consistent with procedures described in EPA's current aquatic life
criteria guidelines; the freshwater acute value is approximately the
same as the 2001 acute criterion for dissolved cadmium. The draft
freshwater chronic criterion is slightly higher (i.e., less stringent)
compared to the 2001 criterion for dissolved cadmium; this increase is
primarily due to the inclusion of new data.
    The draft estuarine/marine acute criterion for dissolved cadmium is
slightly more stringent than the 2001 recommended criterion, which is
primarily due to the addition of data. Draft changes in suggested
values between 2001 and 2015 can be found in Table 1 below.

                      Table 1--Summary of 2001 and 2015 Draft Aquatic Life AWQC for Cadmium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             2015 AWQC Update                            2001 AWQC
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Acute (1-hour,      Chronic (4-day,      Acute (1-day,      Chronic (4-day,
                                   dissolved Cd)\c\      dissolved Cd)       dissolved Cd)       dissolved Cd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freshwater (Total Hardness = 100  2.1 [micro]g/L \b\  0.73 [micro]g/L...  2.0 [micro]g/L \b\  0.25 [micro]g/L.
 mg/L as CaCO3) \a\.
Estuarine/marine................  35 [micro]g/L.....  8.3 [micro]g/L....  40 [micro]g/L.....  8.8 [micro]g/L.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Freshwater acute and chronic criteria are hardness-dependent and were normalized to a hardness of 100 mg/L
  as CaCO3 to allow the presentation of representative criteria values.
\b\ Lowered to protect the commercially and recreationally important species (rainbow trout), as per the 1985
  Guidelines, Stephen et al. (1985).
\c\ The duration of the 2015 acute criteria was changed to 1-hour to reflect the 1985 Guidelines-based
  recommended acute duration.

    EPA will consider the public comments, revise the document as
necessary, and issue a final updated cadmium criteria document. This
draft criteria document does not represent and should not be construed
to represent any final EPA policy, viewpoint, or determination.

V. What is the relationship between the draft chronic water quality
criterion and your state or tribal water quality standards?

    As part of the WQS triennial review process defined in section
303(c)(1) of the CWA, the states and authorized tribes are responsible
for maintaining and revising WQS. Standards consist of designated uses,
water quality criteria to protect those uses, a policy for
antidegradation, and may include general policies for application and
implementation. Section 303(c)(1) requires states and authorized tribes
to review and modify, if appropriate, their WQS at least once every
three years.
    States and authorized tribes must adopt water quality criteria that
protect designated uses. Protective criteria are based on a sound
scientific rationale and contain sufficient parameters or constituents
to protect the designated uses. Criteria may be expressed in either
narrative or numeric form. States and authorized tribes have four
options when adopting water quality criteria for

which EPA has published section 304(a) criteria. They can:
    (1) Establish numerical values based on recommended section 304(a)
criteria;
    (2) Adopt section 304(a) criteria modified to reflect site-specific
conditions;
    (3) Adopt criteria derived using other scientifically defensible
methods; or
    (4) Establish narrative criteria where numeric criteria cannot be
established or to supplement numerical criteria (40 CFR 131.11(b)).
    EPA's regulation at 40 CFR 131.20(a) states that if a state does
not adopt new or revised criteria parameters for which EPA has
published new or updated recommendations, then the state shall provide
an explanation when it submits the results of its triennial review to
the Regional Administrator consistent with CWA section 303(c)(1). The
recommendations in the draft cadmium criteria document may change based
on scientific views shared in response to this notice. Upon
finalization, the updated cadmium criteria would supersede EPA's
previous 304(a) criteria for cadmium. Consistent with 40 CFR 131.21,
new or revised water quality criteria adopted into law or regulation by
states and authorized tribes on or after May 30, 2 000 are applicable
water quality standards for CWA purposes only after EPA approval.

VI. Solicitation of Scientific Views

    EPA is soliciting additional scientific views, data, and
information regarding the science and technical approach used by the
Agency in the derivation of this draft criteria for cadmium. The Agency
is also interested in obtaining information regarding new toxicity
tests on Hyalella azteca (amphipod); latent acute effects of cadmium
following short exposures; and new estuarine marine chronic toxicity
tests.

VII. Additional Information

    EPA conducted a contractor-led and independent external peer review
of the draft Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Cadmium
document in October 2015. EPA will make the external peer review
comments and Agency responses to these comments available in the docket
with the revised draft cadmium criteria document at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 24, 2015.
Joel Beauvais,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2015-30493 Filed 11-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 103)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30483-30485]
[DOCID:fr28my08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0373]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Ambrose Light, Offshore Sandy Hook, NJ, Atlantic
Ocean

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
waters of the Atlantic Ocean within a 250 yard radius of Ambrose Light
(LLNR 720) located at position 40[deg]27[min]00[sec] N,
073[deg]48[min]00[sec] W, approximately 8.35 nautical miles east of
Sandy Hook, NJ. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety
of life, property and the environment on navigable waters of the United
States from the hazards associated with the damaged structure and
during survey and debris removal at the charted location of Ambrose
Light that was recently damaged. This safety zone is intended to keep
vessels a safe distance from Ambrose Light during the survey and debris
removal operations.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59 p.m. on May 5, 2008 through
11:59 p.m. on November 1, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0373 and are available online
at www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection or
copying at two locations: the 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, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and at Coast
Guard Sector New York, Room 209, Staten Island, NY 10305 between 8 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Lieutenant Commander Mike McBrady, Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard Sector New York<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. A notice and comment period
was not held for this rulemaking because the safety zone is needed in
response to an emergency situation created when the Ambrose Light was
struck and damaged by a vessel. A survey and debris removal operations
are needed immediately to remove this hazard to navigation. Delaying
the necessary survey and debris removal in order to conduct a notice
and comment period would be contrary to the public interest.
    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 as immediate action is needed to
protect vessels transiting the area from the hazards associated with
the damaged light tower, area survey, and debris removal operations.
Any delay in implementing this rule would be contrary to public
interest since immediate action is needed to prevent vessels from
transiting the area so as to avoid the potential hazards associated
with the unstable light, the possibility of it collapsing, or a vessel
grounding on the remains of Ambrose Light (LLNR 720).

Background and Purpose

    On Saturday, November 3, 2007, the M/T AXEL SPIRIT allided with
Ambrose Light (LLNR 720) in position 40[deg]27[min]00[sec] N,
073[deg]48[min]00[sec] W approximately 8.35 nautical miles east of
Sandy Hook, NJ. Initial damage assessment indicates that the Ambrose
Light is no longer watching properly and in danger of collapse,
creating an additional hazard to vessels operating in the area. This
safety zone is being created in response to this emergency situation in
order to keep mariners away from the hazards associated with the
damaged structure and from the hazards associated with survey and
debris removal operations.
    On November 26, 2007 we published a Temporary Final Rule in the
Federal Register (72 FR 65886) titled ``Safety Zone: Ambrose Light,
Offshore Sandy Hook, NJ, Atlantic Ocean'' establishing a temporary
safety zone around Ambrose Light after it was initially struck. This
safety zone was effective from November 5, 2007 until May 5, 2008. The
Coast Guard's Civil Engineering Unit in Providence, Rhode Island does
not expect to award the contract to remove the tower and associated
debris until on, or about, May 1, 2008. It is expected that the removal
operations will take about 75 days. This 180-day temporary rulemaking
will

allow for the safe removal and provide for any expected delays due to
weather, equipment malfunctions, etc. If the survey and debris removal
is completed before November 1, 2008, the Coast Guard will cease
enforcement of the safety zone.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule will provide for the safety of vessel traffic in and
around Ambrose Light (LLNR 720). This regulation establishes a
temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the Atlantic Ocean
within a 250 yard radius of position 40[deg]27[min]00[sec] N,
73[deg]48[min]00[sec] W, approximately 8.35 nautical miles east of
Sandy Hook, NJ. The rule described herein prohibits the transit of
vessels through the safety zone unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port, New York. This safety zone is in effect from 11:59
p.m. on May 5, 2008 until 11:59 p.m. on November 1, 2008. The zone will
be enforced during the entire effective period unless the survey, tower
and debris removal operation is completed prior to November 1, 2008.
    Marine traffic may transit safely outside of the zone during the
enforcement period. The Captain of the Port New York will notify the
maritime community of the safety zone by publication in the Local
Notice to Mariners, Safety Voice Broadcasts, and on the internet at
http://homeport.uscg.mil/newyork.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This 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 rule will be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and
procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This regulation may have some impact
on the public, but the potential impact will be minimized for the
following reason: Vessels may transit around the 250 yard safety zone.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit within a 250 yard radius of Ambrose Light (LLNR 720) at
40[deg]27[min]00[sec] N, 73[deg]48[min]00[sec] W approximately 8.35
nautical miles east of Sandy Hook, NJ. However, this safety zone is not
expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities as vessels will be able to transit around the 250
yard safety zone.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). 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.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls 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 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 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. This rule fits category (34)(g) as it
establishes a safety zone.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' will be available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 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.

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T01-165 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-165  Safety Zone: Ambrose Light, Offshore Sandy Hook, NJ,
Atlantic Ocean.

    (a) Location. The following area is a Safety Zone: All navigable
waters of the Atlantic Ocean within a 250 yard radius of Ambrose Light
(LLNR 720) at position 40[deg]27'00'' N, 73[deg]48'00'' W,
approximately 8.35 nautical miles east of Sandy Hook, NJ.
    (b) Effective Dates. This regulation is effective from 11:59 p.m.
on May 5, 2008 to 11:59 p.m. on November 1, 2008.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
On-scene representative, means any commissioned, warrant, and petty
officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who
have been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port,
New York.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply.
    (2) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port New York, or
his on-scene representative.

    Dated: May 5, 2008.
R.R. O'Brien, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
 [FR Doc. E8-11868 Filed 5-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P