[Federal Register: November 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 221)]
[Notices]
[Page 66759]
[DOCID:fr16no06-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-22-000]

Jump Power, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

November 8, 2006.
    Jump Power, LLC (Jump) filed an application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying tariff. The proposed market-based rate
tariff provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services
at market-based rates. Jump also requested waivers of various
Commission regulations. In particular, Jump requested that the
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Jump.
    On November 6, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
Jump should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is December 6, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Jump is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of
Jump, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary
or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Jump's issuance of securities or assumptions of
liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-19327 Filed 11-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 19101]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8125]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002]

Request for Notification From Industry Organizations Interested
in Participating in the Selection Process for a Nonvoting Industry
Representative and Request for Nominations for a Nonvoting Industry
Representative on an FDA Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any
industry organizations interested in participating in the selection of
a nonvoting industry representative to serve on its Allergenic Products
Advisory Committee notify FDA in writing. A nominee may either be self-
nominated or nominated by an organization to serve as a nonvoting
industry representative. Nomination will be accepted for current
vacancies effective with this notice.

DATES: Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating the interest to FDA by May 6, 2011
for vacancies listed in the notice. Concurrently, nomination material
for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA by May 6, 2011.

ADDRESSES: All letters of interest and nominations should be submitted
in writing to Gail Dapolito (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail Dapolito, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Agency requests nominations for a nonvoting industry
representative on the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee. The
Allergenic Products Advisory Committee advises the Commissioner or
designee in discharging responsibilities as they relate to the
regulation of allergenic products. This Committee has nine voting
members. Members are asked to provide their expert scientific and
technical advice to FDA to help make sound decisions on the safety,
effectiveness, appropriate use, and labeling of allergenic biological
products.

II. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of
this document. Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send a letter to
each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching a complete
list of all such organizations, and a list of all nominees along with
their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is the
responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one
another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of
the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests for the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee.
    The interested organizations are not bound by the list of nominees
in selecting a candidate. However, if no individual is selected within
60 days, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs will select the nonvoting
member to represent industry interests.

III. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self-nominate and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. A current curriculum vitae and the name of the
committee of interest should be sent to the FDA contact person within
the 30 days following nomination. FDA will forward all nominations to
the organizations expressing interest in participating in the selection
process for the committee. (Persons who nominate themselves as
nonvoting industry representatives will not participate in the
selection process).
    FDA has a special interest in ensuring that women, minority groups,
individuals with physical disabilities, and small businesses are
adequately represented on its advisory committees and, therefore,
encourages nominations for appropriately qualified candidates from
these groups. Specifically, in this document, nominations for nonvoting
representatives of industry interests are encouraged from the
allergenic product manufacturing industry.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: March 31, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-8125 Filed 4-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: August 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 147)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 38384-38385]
[DOCID:fr03au09-18]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0482; FRL-8938-7]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; West Virginia; Control of
Emissions From Existing Commercial and Industrial Incineration (CISWI)
Units, Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve a revision to the West Virginia (WV)
commercial and industrial solid waste incinerator (CISWI) 111(d)/129
plan (the ``plan''). The revision contains a modified WV Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality (DAQ) rule,
WV45CSR18, that streamlines the state's regulatory structure for
incinerator units into one rule which incorporates Clean Air Act (CAA),
section 129 requirements. This approval action relates only to CISWI
units. In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the State of West Virginia's CISWI plan revision submittal as
a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views
this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action,
no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments,
the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period.

Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by September 2, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2009-0482 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0482, Walter Wilkie, Chief, Air Quality
Analysis Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2009-0482 EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the West Virginia Division of Air
Quality, 601 57th Street, SE., Charleston, West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James B. Topsale, P.E., at (215) 814-
2190, or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please note that while
questions may be posed via phone and e-mail, formal comments must be
submitted in writing, as indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this
document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title,
that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this
Federal Register publication.

    Dated: July 21, 2009.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.
[FR Doc. E9-18479 Filed 7-31-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 30, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74000-74003]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30785]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0776; FRL-9498-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning; Louisiana; Baton Rouge Area:
Redesignation to Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve the State of Louisiana's
request to redesignate the Baton Rouge, Louisiana moderate 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. As a part of this action, EPA is also approving, as a
revision to the Louisiana State Implementation Plan (SIP), the state's
1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan with a 2022 Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budget (MVEB) for the Baton Rouge Nonattainment Area (BRNA or BR),
revisions to the Louisiana SIP that meet the Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) requirements (for nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)) for the 1-hour
and 1997 8-hour ozone standard requirements, and a state rule
establishing a maintenance plan contingency measure. EPA finds that
with this final approval the area has a fully approved SIP that meets
all of its applicable 1997 8-hour ozone requirements and 1-hour anti-
backsliding requirements under section 110 and Part D of the Federal
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for purposes of redesignation.

DATE: This rule is effective December 30, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0776. All documents in the docket
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Planning Section, Air Planning Branch,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business is Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sandra Rennie, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' means EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this rule?
II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?
III. What actions is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this rule?

    The background for today's action is discussed in detail in EPA's
August 30, 2011, proposal to approve Louisiana's redesignation request
(76 FR 53853). In that proposed action, we noted that, under EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is
attained when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations is less than or equal to
0.08 parts per million (ppm) (see 69 FR 23858, April 30, 2004, for more
information). Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate a nonattainment area
to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and if
it meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section
107(d)(3)(E).
    The LDEQ, on August 31, 2010, submitted a request \1\ to
redesignate the Baton Rouge area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard. EPA has previously determined that the BRNA ozone
nonattainment area attained both the 1997 8-hour and 1-hour ozone
standards. The EPA determined that the BRNA had attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard on September 8, 2010, at 75 FR 54779. Complete,
quality-assured monitoring data for 2006-2010 also show that the area
continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA also determined
that the BR area met the 1-hour ozone standard on February 10, 2010 (75
FR 6570). This determination was also based on complete, quality-
assured, and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the
2006-2008 ozone seasons, as well as certified data for 2009 and 2010
that indicate the area continues to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Preliminary data available for the 2011 ozone season indicate that the
area continues to be in attainment for both ozone standards.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The submittal was supplemented by technical amendments on
February 14, 2011, May 16, 2011, and June 6, 2011. All submitted
documents are in the docket for this rulemaking.
    \2\ On September 22, 2011, EPA moved ahead to implement the 2008
8-hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm. Memorandum from Gina McCarthy to
Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10. EPA will continue to work with
the state to implement this new standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed rule and Technical Support Document provide a detailed
analysis of how Louisiana met the redesignation requirements and other
CAA requirements. The state's Control Techniques Guidelines rule upon
which this action depends, was signed on November 7, 2011, and will be
published in a separate rulemaking. Implementation of Reformulated
Gasoline (RFG) in the Baton Rouge 5-parish area remains stayed by court
order. Implementation of RFG is not required for purposes of
redesignation.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period, which closed on
September 29, 2011. EPA received 3 comment letters in response to the
proposed rulemaking, submitted on behalf of the Louisiana Chemical
Association, Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, and the
Baton Rouge Area Chamber of Commerce, that expressed overall support
for EPA's

proposed approval to redesignate the BR ozone nonattainment area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The comment letters are
available for review in the docket for this rulemaking.

III. What actions is EPA taking?

    EPA is taking final action to approve several related actions under
the Act for the BR ozone nonattainment area, consisting of Ascension,
East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge Parishes.
Consistent with the Act, EPA is taking final action to approve a
request from the state of Louisiana to redesignate the BRNA to
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    EPA is taking final action to approve into the SIP, as meeting
section 175A and 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the Act, Louisiana's maintenance
plan for the BR area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance
plan shows maintenance of the standard through 2022. Additionally, EPA
has found adequate and is approving the 2022 MVEBs for NOX
and VOC. The submitted NOX and VOC MVEB for the BR area is
defined in Table 1 below.

                        Table 1--NOX and VOC MVEB
                      [Summer season tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Pollutant                               2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX............................................................     6.96
VOC............................................................     7.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also taking final action to approve a contingency measure
for the maintenance plan.
    Consequently, EPA is taking final action to approve the State's
request to redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. After evaluating Louisiana's redesignation
request, EPA has determined that with this final approval of the above-
identified SIP elements and the maintenance plan, the area meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) and section
175A of the Act. The final approval of this redesignation request
changes the official designation in 40 CFR part 81 for the BR area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    We find that the BR area meets all the applicable CAA requirements
for purposes of redesignation of the 1997 8-hour standard that includes
all of the antibacksliding CAA requirements for the BR 1-hour severe
ozone nonattainment area. Therefore, along with this final
redesignation to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and our
previous determination of attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard, the
1-hour anti-backsliding obligations to submit planning SIPs to meet the
attainment demonstration reasonably available control measures (RACM)
requirements, ROP and contingency measures requirements, cease to
apply. In addition, after final redesignation to attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard, EPA does not require the continued
application of nonattainment New Source Review. Louisiana's Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program can apply in the Baton Rouge
area so long as Louisiana interprets its SIP as applying PSD to the
BRNA in these circumstances. As we noted in the proposal, Louisiana's
PSD program will become effective in BRNA upon redesignation to
attainment unless a SIP revision is necessary; then it must adopt and
submit that to EPA for action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, redesignation of an area to attainment and
the accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those imposed by State law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in
the applicability of requirements contained in the Clean Air Act for
areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the
Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies
with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the
criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these actions merely do not
impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law and
the Clean Air Act. For that reason, these actions:
     Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Do 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, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: November 7, 2011.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart T--Louisiana

0
2. Section 52.970 is amended as follows:
0
a. The table in paragraph (c) entitled, ``EPA Approved Louisiana
Regulations in the Louisiana SIP'' is amended under Chapter 22, Control
of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX), by adding a new entry
for Section 2201, and, immediately following the entry for Section
2201.H.3, by adding a new entry for Section 2202;
0
b. The second table in paragraph (e) entitled, ``EPA-Approved Louisiana
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures'' is amended by
adding a new entry at the end.
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                             EPA-Approved Louisiana Regulations in the Louisiana SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State approval
          State citation              Title/subject          date        EPA approval date         Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Chapter 22--Control of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 2201.....................  Affected Facilities       1/20/2010  11/30/11, [Insert    Revisions to
                                    in the Baton Rouge                   FR page number       Section 2201
                                    Nonattainment Area                   where document       approved in the
                                    and the Region of                    begins].             Louisiana Register
                                    Influence.                                                January 20, 2010
                                                                                (LR 36:60).

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 2202.....................  Contingency Plan...       1/20/2010  11/30/11, [Insert    Section 2202
                                                                         FR page number       approved in the
                                                                         where document       Louisiana Register
                                                                         begins].             January 20, 2010
                                                                                (LR 36:63).

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

    (e) * * *
* * * * *

                  EPA-Approved Louisiana Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable           State
     Name of SIP  provision          geographic or     submittal date/   EPA approval date       Explanation
                                   nonattainment area  effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment   Baton Rouge, LA....       8/31/2010  11/30/11, [Insert FR
 Area Redesignation Request and                                         page number where
 Maintenance Plan.                                                      document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.977 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.977  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (d) Redesignation for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard. Effective
December 30, 2011, EPA has redesignated the Baton Rouge area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. With this final
redesignation to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
final determination of attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in
paragraph (a) of this section, the 1-hour anti-backsliding obligations
to submit planning SIPs to meet the attainment demonstration and
reasonably available control measures requirements, the rate of
progress and contingency measures requirements, and any other
outstanding 1-hour requirements, cease to apply.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
5. In Sec.  81.319, the table entitled, ``Louisiana--Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)''

is amended by: revising the entries for Baton Rouge Area; and adding a
new footnote 2 at the end of the table.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  81.319  Louisiana.

* * * * *

                                       Louisiana--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Designation \a\                       Category/classification
       Designated area       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Date \1\               Type               Date \1\               Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baton Rouge Area:
    Ascension Parish........               (\2\)          Attainment.
    East Baton Rouge Parish.               (\2\)          Attainment.
    Iberville Parish........               (\2\)          Attainment.
    Livingston Parish.......               (\2\)          Attainment.
    West Baton Rouge Parish.               (\2\)          Attainment.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Effective December 30, 2011.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2011-30785 Filed 11-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67248-67251]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26430]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0019; Product Identifier 2017-SW-074-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for Airbus Helicopters Model AS332L2 and EC225LP helicopters. This
proposed AD would require determining the accumulated hours time-in-
service (TIS) of certain part-numbered main gearbox (MGB) suspension
bar attachment bolts and fittings, applying a life limit add-on factor,
and inspecting the torque of certain MGB suspension bar attachment
nuts. This proposed AD is prompted by a report of torque loss on an MGB
suspension bar bolt. The actions of this proposed AD are intended to
address an unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 7,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0019; 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 proposed AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, the
economic evaluation, 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 service information identified in this proposed rule, contact
Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may
review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. The FAA also invites comments
relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts
that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The
most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments,
commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if
comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one
time.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments received, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal,
the FAA will consider all comments received on or before the closing
date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light of the
comments received.

Discussion

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2017-0189, dated September 22,
2017, to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus Helicopters (formerly
Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale) Model AS 332 L2 and EC 225
LP helicopters. Following review of reported Model EC 225 LP data, EASA
advises that the installation of the MGB upper deck fittings of the
three MGB suspension bars could lead to tightening torque loss on the
fittings' attachment pins (bolts). Due to design similarities, Model AS
332 L2 helicopters could also be affected by the same installation
condition. An investigation determined that the life limits in the
Airworthiness Limitations Sections for the pins and fittings are valid
if an ``add-on penalty factor'' is applied.
    EASA states that this condition, if not corrected, could lead to
structural failure of the MGB suspension bar attachment pins or
fittings. Accordingly, the EASA AD requires applying the add-on penalty
factor to the flight hours to re-calculate the life limits and
replacing an affected part before exceeding its life limit.
    EASA further advises that Airbus Helicopters' initial service
information contained an error that may have resulted in the
installation of pins or fittings using an incorrect torque value. As a
result, the EASA AD also requires replacing pins if an incorrect torque
value was applied and reporting the information to Airbus Helicopters.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA of the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD
after evaluating all known relevant information and determining that an
unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other products of the
same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Emergency Alert Service
Bulletin (EASB) No. 01.00.86 for Model AS332 helicopters and Airbus
Helicopters EASB No. 04A013 for Model EC225LP helicopters, both
Revision 1 and dated August 25, 2017. This service information
specifies applying an add-on factor to the flying hours logged by the
pins and fittings and replacing them if the service life limit (SLL) is
exceeded. If an incorrect tightening torque value was applied to the
pins, the service information specifies replacing the pins and
contacting Airbus Helicopters.
    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.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require for Airbus Helicopters Model AS332L2
and EC225LP helicopters, within 30 hours time-in-service (TIS) and
thereafter following each flight, re-calculating the life limit
accumulated by each front bolt part number (P/N) 332A22-1613-21 or
332A22-1613-20 and rear bolt P/N 332A22-1614-20 by applying an add-on
factor listed in the applicable service information. If the bolt meets
or exceeds its life limit, also known as SLL, this proposed AD would
require removing the bolt from service before further flight.
    For Model AS332L2 helicopters, within 30 hours TIS and thereafter
following each flight, this proposed AD would require re-calculating
the life limit accumulated by the front attachment fitting P/N 332A22-
1623-01, rear left hand attachment fitting P/N 332A22-1624-02 or
332A22-1624-04, and rear right hand attachment fitting P/N 332A22-1624-
03 or 332A22-1624-05 by applying an add-on factor listed in the
applicable service information. If the fitting meets or exceeds its
life limit, this proposed AD would require removing the fitting from
service before further flight.
    For Model AS332L2 helicopters, within 150 hours TIS (without
applying an add on-factor), this proposed AD would require inspecting
the torque of each MGB suspension bar fitting front and rear nut. If
the torque on any nut is higher than the maximum allowable limit, the
proposed AD would require removing the nut and its bolt from service
before further flight. If the torque on any nut is lower than the
minimum allowable limit, this proposed AD would require tightening the
nut before further flight and removing the nut and its bolt from
service within 150 hours TIS.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD allows an optional 150 hours TIS extension to the life
limit of an affected fitting for Model AS 332 L2 helicopters by
performing dye-penetrant inspections. This AD does not allow this
option. For Model AS 332 L2 helicopters, the EASA AD requires replacing
pins (bolts) that are replacement pins installed before the AD's
effective date with an incorrect torque value applied. This AD requires
inspecting the torque for each nut for Model AS332L2 helicopters
instead and depending on the outcome, removing the nut and its bolt
from service.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 23 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD.
    Determining the adjusted life limit for the bolts and fittings
would take about 0.5 work-hour for an estimated cost of $43 per
helicopter and $989 for the U.S. fleet. Replacing a bolt would take
about 4 work-hours and parts would cost about $89 for an estimated cost
of $429 per bolt.
    There are no costs of compliance for replacing a fitting and
inspecting, and if necessary tightening, the torque for Model AS332L2
helicopters by this proposed AD because there are no Model AS332L2
helicopters on the U.S. Registry.

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 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, I certify this 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.
    The FAA prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2018-0019; Product Identifier
2017-SW-074-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model AS332L2 and EC225LP
helicopters, certificated in any category, with a main gearbox (MGB)
suspension bar front attachment bolt (bolt) part number (P/N)
332A22-1613-21 or 332A22-1613-20, MGB suspension bar rear bolt P/N
332A22-1614-20, MGB suspension bar front attachment fitting
(fitting) P/N 332A22-1623-01, MGB suspension bar rear left hand
fitting P/N 332A22-1624-02 or 332A22-1624-04, or MGB suspension bar
rear right hand fitting P/N 332A22-1624-03 or 332A22-1624-05
installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as MGB suspension bar bolts
and fittings remaining in service beyond their fatigue life and
loose MGB suspension bar bolts or fittings, which could result in
structural failure of the MGB suspension bar and loss of helicopter
control.

(c) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by February 7, 2020.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 30 hours time-in-service (TIS), review records to
determine the total hours TIS of each MGB suspension bar bolt.
    (i) Determine the life limit of each bolt by applying the hours
TIS by the add-on factor listed in Table No. 1 of Airbus Helicopters
Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 01.00.86, Revision 1, dated
August 25, 2017 (EASB 01.00.86), or Airbus Helicopters Emergency
Alert Service Bulletin No. 04A013, Revision 1, dated August 25,
2017, as applicable to your model helicopter.
    Note 1 to paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this AD: Airbus Helicopters
refers to bolts as ``pins.''
    (A) Before further flight, remove from service any bolt that has
reached or exceeded its life limit.
    (B) For each bolt that has not exceeded its life limit, continue
to calculate and record the life limit on its component history card
or equivalent record by applying the add-on factor each time the
helicopter accumulates hours TIS, and remove from service any bolt
before reaching its life limit.
    (ii) Thereafter following paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this AD,
continue to calculate and record the life limit of each bolt on its
component history card or equivalent record by applying the add-on
factor each time the helicopter accumulates hours TIS and remove
from service any bolt before reaching its life limit.
    (2) For Model AS332L2 helicopters, within 30 hours TIS, review
records to determine the total hours TIS of each MGB suspension bar
fitting.
    (i) Determine the life limit of each fitting by applying the
hours TIS by the add-on factor listed in Table No. 1 of EASB
01.00.86.
    (A) Before further flight, remove from service any fitting that
has reached or exceeded its life limit.
    (B) For each fitting that has not exceeded its life limit,
continue to calculate and record the life limit on its component
history card or equivalent record by applying the add-on factor each
time the helicopter accumulates hours TIS, and remove from service
any fitting before reaching its life limit.
    (ii) Thereafter following paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this AD,
continue to calculate and record the life limit of each fitting on
its component history card or equivalent record by applying the add-
on factor each time the helicopter accumulates hours TIS and remove
from service any fitting before reaching its life limit.
    (3) For Model AS332L2 helicopters, within 150 hours TIS (without
the add-on factor), inspect the torque of each MGB suspension bar
attachment front and rear nut. The

allowable torque for each front nut is 602-663 lbf. in (6.8-7.5
daN.m) and the allowable torque for each rear nut is 337-398 lbf. in
(3.8-4.5 daN.m).
    (i) If the torque on any nut is higher than the maximum
allowable torque stated in paragraph (e)(3) of this AD, before
further flight, remove from service the bolt and nut.
    (ii) If the torque on any nut is lower than the minimum
allowable torque value stated in paragraph (e)(3) of this AD, before
further flight, tighten the nut to the allowable torque stated in
paragraph (e)(3) of this AD. Within 150 hours TIS (without the add-
on factor), remove from service any bolt and nut that were tightened
as required by this paragraph.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards
Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to:
Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management
Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, the FAA suggests
that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office
or certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2017-0189, dated September 22, 2017. You may
view the EASA AD on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov in
the AD Docket.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6320, Main Rotor
Gearbox.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 29, 2019.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-26430 Filed 12-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531 - 1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. In light of the interest in this rule among governmental entities, the EPA initiated consultation with governmental entities. The EPA invited the following 10 national organizations representing state and local elected officials to a virtual meeting on September 22, 2022: (1) National Governors Association, (2) National Conference of State Legislatures, (3) Council of State Governments, (4) National League of Cities, (5) U.S. Conference of Mayors, (6) National Association of Counties, (7) International City/County Management Association, (8) National Association of Towns and Townships, (9) County Executives of America, and (10) Environmental Council of States. These 10 organizations representing elected state and local officials have been identified by the EPA as the "Big 10" organizations appropriate to contact for purpose of consultation with elected officials. Also, the EPA invited air and utility professional groups who may have state and local government members, such as the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies, National Association of Clean Air Agencies, and others to participate in the meeting. The purpose of the consultation was to provide general background on the review of the MATS RTR, answer questions, and solicit input from state and local governments. Subsequent to the September 22, 2022, meeting, the EPA received a letter from the American Public Power Association (APPA). The EPA opened a non-rulemaking docket for public input on the EPA's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing fossil fuel-fired EGUs. The APPA letter was submitted to the non-rulemaking docket. See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0723-0016. In that letter, APPA stated that they were not able to identify any new cost-effective technologies to reduce HAP emissions and that many of the current technologies used are state-of-the-art controls that continue to reduce HAP emissions. In addition, APPA stated there have been no developments in the emission control practices or processes available to control HAP emissions during startup and shutdown periods. Also, APPA stated that they support of the continuation of the 30-day rolling average to assure compliance with MATS emission requirements to allow for hourly variability caused by unit operation and load requirements, including startup and shutdown events.
 E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
The EPA believes, however, that this action may be of interest to state and/or local governments. Consistent with the EPA's policy to promote communication between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA consulted with representatives of state and local governments in the process of developing the proposed amendments to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. The EPA's consultation regarded planned actions for the review of the MATS RTR. The EPA met with 10 national organizations representing state and local elected officials to provide general background on the review of the MATS RTR, answer questions, and solicit input from state and local governments. The UMRA discussion in this preamble includes a description of the consultation. In the spirit of EO 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between state and local governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action from state and local officials.
 F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. The executive order defines tribal implications as "actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes." The amendments proposed in this action would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more tribes, change the relationship between the Federal Government and tribes, or affect the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
Although this action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175, the EPA consulted with tribal officials during the development of this action. On September 1, 2022, the EPA sent a letter to all federally recognized Indian tribes initiating consultation to obtain input on this proposal. The EPA did not receive any requests from consultation from Indian tribes. The EPA also participated in the September 2022 National Tribal Air Association EPA Air Policy Update Call to solicit input on this proposed action.
 G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
This proposed rule is subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and the EPA believes that this rule will reduce emissions of Hg and non-Hg HAP with the potential to reduce HAP exposure to vulnerable populations including children. Accordingly, we have evaluated the environmental health or safety effects from exposure to HAP on children. The results of this evaluation are contained in the RIA and are available in the docket for this action. The EPA believes that the PM2.5-related, ozone-related, and CO2-related benefits projected under this proposed rule will further improve children's health. Specifically, the PM2.5 and ozone EJ exposure analyses in Section 6 of the RIA suggests that nationally, children (ages 0-17) will experience at least as great a reduction in PM2.5 and ozone exposures as adults (ages 18-64) in 2028, 2030 and 2035 under all regulatory alternatives of this rulemaking.
 H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a "significant energy action" because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. For 2028, the compliance year for the proposed standards, the EPA projects a less than 0.1 percent change in retail electricity prices on average across the contiguous U.S., a less than 0.1 percent reduction in coal-fired electricity generation, and a less than 0.1 percent increase in natural gas-fired electricity generation. The EPA does not project a significant change in utility power sector delivered natural gas prices in 2028. Details of the projected energy effects are presented in Section 3 of the RIA, which is in the public docket.
 I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
 J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make EJ part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations (people of color and/or Indigenous peoples) and low-income populations. The EPA believes that the human health or environmental conditions that exist prior to this action result in or have the potential to result in disproportionate and adverse human health or environmental effects on people of color, low-income populations and/or Indigenous peoples. The documentation for this decision is contained in section VI.F of this this proposed rule and in Section 6, Environmental Justice Impacts of the RIA, which is in the public document.
Baseline demographic proximity analyses provide information as to whether there may be potential EJ concerns associated with environmental stressors, in this case, local HAP, NO2, and SO2 emitted from sources affected by the regulatory action for certain population groups of concern (RIA Section 6.3). The baseline demographic proximity analyses examined the demographics of populations living within 10 km of the following sources: lignite plants with units potentially subject to the proposed Hg standard revision, coal plants with units potentially subject to the proposed fPM standard revision, and coal plants with units potentially subject to the alternate fPM standard revision. The baseline analysis indicates that on average the percentage of the population living within 10 km of coal plants potentially subject to the proposed or alternate fPM standards have a higher percentage of people living two times below the poverty level than the national average. In addition, on average the percentage of the Native American population living within 10 km of lignite plants potentially subject to proposed Hg standard is higher than the national average. Relating these results to question 1 from Section 6.3 of the RIA, we conclude that there may be potential EJ concerns associated with directly emitted pollutants that are affected by the regulatory action (e.g., NO2) for certain population groups of concern in the baseline (question 1). However, as proximity to affected facilities does not capture variation in baseline exposure across communities, nor does it indicate that any exposures or impacts will occur, these results should not be interpreted as a direct measure of exposure or impact.
Considering the known limitations of proximity analyses, including the inability to assess policy-specific impacts, we performed analyses of baseline EJ ozone and PM2.5 exposures. Baseline ozone and PM2.5 exposure analyses show that certain populations, such as Hispanics, Asians, those linguistically isolated, those less educated, and children may experience disproportionately higher ozone and PM2.5 exposures as compared to the national average. American Indians may also experience disproportionately higher ozone concentrations than the reference group.
The EPA believes that this action is not likely to change existing disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income populations and/or Indigenous peoples. Specifically, we do not find evidence that potential EJ concerns related to ozone or PM2.5 exposures will be meaningfully exacerbated or mitigated in the regulatory alternatives under consideration as compared to the baseline due to the small magnitude of ozone and PM2.5 concentration changes associated with this rule relative to baseline disparities and the very small differences in the distributional analyses of post-policy ozone and PM2.5 exposure impacts. Importantly, the action described in this rule is expected to lower ozone and PM2.5 in certain areas, and thus mitigate some pre-existing health risks across all populations evaluated.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Michael S. Regan,

Administrator.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 209 (Friday, October 28, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66871-66872]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27966]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0540; Airspace Docket No. 11-ASO-20]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Inverness, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E Airspace at
Inverness, FL, to accommodate new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global
Positioning System (GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures at
Inverness Airport. This action would enhance the safety and airspace
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-(800) 647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2011-0540; Airspace Docket No. 11-ASO-20, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2011-0540; Airspace Docket No. 11-ASO-20) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2011-0540; Airspace Docket No. 11-ASO-20.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace at
Inverness, FL, providing the controlled airspace required to support
the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for
Inverness Airport. Controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface would be established for the safety and management of
IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign
the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace at Inverness
Airport, Inverness, FL.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011,
is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASO FL E5 Inverness, FL [New]

Inverness Airport, FL
    (Lat. 28[deg]48'22'' N., long. 82[deg]19'09'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Inverness Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 21, 2011.
Michael Vermuth,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2011-27966 Filed 10-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44369-44370]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2015-0001; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1510]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency; DHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On May 6, 2015, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed flood hazard determination notice that contained erroneous
tables. This notice provides corrections to those tables, to be used in
lieu of the information published at 80 FR 26068-26070. The tables
provided here represent the proposed flood hazard determinations and
communities affected for Lee County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
and San Patricio County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before October 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and where
applicable, the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for each community
are available for inspection at both the online location and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1510, to
Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed in the table below, in
accordance with Section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP may only be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the table below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard determinations shown on the Preliminary FIRM and
FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR
67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations will also be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
are made final.

Correction

    In the proposed flood hazard determination notice published at 80
FR 26068-26070 in the May 6, 2015, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA
published tables titled ``Lee County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas''
and ``San Patricio County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas''. These
tables contained inaccurate information as to the community name for
the Unincorporated Areas of Lee County and the community map repository
address for the City of San Patricio. In this document, FEMA is
publishing the tables containing the accurate information. The
information provided below should be used in lieu of that previously
published.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: July 17, 2015.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Lee County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 14-04-A039S Preliminary Date: December 15, 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Fort Myers.....................  Development Department, 1825
                                          Hendry Street, Suite 101, Fort
                                          Myers, FL 33901.
Unincorporated Areas of Lee County.....  Lee County Community
                                          Development Department, 1500
                                          Monroe Street, Second Floor,
                                          Fort Myers, FL 33901.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

           San Patricio County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Project: 07-06-0112S Preliminary Dates: August 29, 2014 and January 16,
                                  2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Aransas Pass...................  City Hall, 600 West Cleveland
                                          Boulevard, Aransas Pass, TX
                                          78336.
City of Gregory........................  City Hall, 204 West 4th Street,
                                          Gregory, TX 78359.
City of Ingleside......................  City Hall Annex, 2665 San
                                          Angelo Street, Ingleside, TX
                                          78362.
City of Ingleside On The Bay...........  Ingleside On The Bay City Hall,
                                          475 Starlight Drive,
                                          Ingleside, TX 78362.
City of Lake City......................  City Hall, 132 Cox Drive, Lake
                                          City, TX 78368.
City of Lakeside.......................  Community Center, 101 Weber
                                          Lane, Lakeside, TX 78368.
City of Mathis.........................  City Hall, 411 East San
                                          Patricio Avenue, Mathis, TX
                                          78368.
City of Odem...........................  City Hall, 514 Voss Avenue,
                                          Odem, TX 78370.
City of Portland.......................  Public Works, 1101 Moore Drive,
                                          Portland, TX 78374.
City of San Patricio...................  City Hall, 4516 Main Street,
                                          San Patricio, TX 78368.
City of Sinton.........................  City Hall, 301 East Market
                                          Street, Sinton, TX 78387.
City of Taft...........................  City Hall, 501 Green Avenue,
                                          Taft, TX 78390.
Unincorporated Areas of San Patricio     San Patricio County Civic
 County.                                  Center, 219 West 5th Street,
                                          Sinton, TX 78387.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-18279 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register: September 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 55389-55390]
[DOCID:fr10se10-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62822; File No. SR-NSX-2010-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 11.13 Regarding Maximum Permissible Response Time for Users
of Order Delivery

September 1, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 31, 2010, National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX
[supreg]'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change, as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed
rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comment on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NSX is proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.13(b)(2) concerning the time
within which ETP Holders submitting displayed orders utilizing the
Order Delivery mode of order interaction must respond to an inbound
order before the ETP Holder's displayed is cancelled.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nsx.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 Exchange 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 these 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend its Rule 11.13(b)(2) concerning
the time within which an ETP Holders submitting displayed orders
utilizing the Order Delivery mode of order interaction (``Order
Delivery'') \5\ must respond to an inbound order before NSX BLADE
[supreg] cancels the ETP Holder's order. Under the proposed rule
change, if no response to an inbound order is received within 300
milliseconds, the ETP Holder's order will be cancelled.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange's two modes of order interaction are described
in NSX Rule 11.13(b).
    \6\ In addition, Rule 11.13(b)(2) provides that, to be eligible
for Order Delivery service, an ETP Holder ``must demonstrate to
Exchange examiners that the User's system can automatically process
the inbound order and respond immediately.'' Interpretation and
Policy .01 provides that the Exchange ``currently considers 100
milliseconds'' to be the maximum permissible response time to an
inbound order. The current rule filing does not propose to change
this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Rule 11.13(b)(2) provides that an ETP Holder's displayed
order in Order Delivery will be cancelled ``if no response to an
inbound order is received within [frac12] of a second.'' Under the
instant rule change, the Exchange proposes to replace reference to ``1/
2 of a second'' with ``300 milliseconds,'' which timeframe the Exchange
considers appropriate at the present time and in conformity with
industry standards. Utilization of the proposed 300 millisecond
response time requirement represents no change to current Exchange
practice.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange is currently conducting a study regarding the
time standards referenced in Rule 11.13, and will submit a rule
change proposing modifications to those standards as necessary and
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effective Date
    The Exchange requests that the instant rule change be approved by
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') immediately
upon filing, and in any case not more than thirty days after the date
of filing of this rule change, or such earlier date as the Commission
determines, because the

instant rule change is non-controversial and presents no novel issues.
2. Statutory Basis
    Approval of the rule change proposed in this submission is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities
exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of
the Act.\8\ In particular, the proposed change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ because it would promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, protect investors and the public interest. The proposed
rule change advances these objectives by establishing a clear and
objective timeframe within which users of Order Delivery submitting
displayed orders must respond to incoming orders before their orders
are cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\12\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that
the Exchange has indicated that its proposal will provide a clear and
objective timeframe, within which users of Order Delivery submitting
displayed orders must respond to incoming orders before their orders
are cancelled. The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal to
reduce from \1/2\ of a second to 300 milliseconds the timeframe for a
user's response to inbound orders on the Exchange's Order Delivery
system will update NSX's rule to reflect its current practice and
represents the first step in NSX's efforts to propose a more
appropriate standard that is more in line with current industry
standards. Based on the foregoing, the Commission believes that waiving
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and hereby designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
    \13\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSX-2010-11 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2010-11. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Web site (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 Web site 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the self-regulatory
organization. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2010-11 and
should be submitted on or before October 1, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-22551 Filed 9-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on April 23, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2003-14679

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  HMY AIRWAYS INC.
                                   Date Filed:  March 10, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct scheduled, combination services between
any point or points in Canada and any point or points in the United
States.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority.

Applicant representative:  Gary B. Garofalo,<PHONE_NUMBER>      DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved
                                             Action date:  April 23,
2003

Effective dates of authority granted:  April 23, 2003, through April 23,
2004

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Canada Air Transport Agreement

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions.

Special conditions/Remarks:

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp