[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 213 (Tuesday, November 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69678-69680]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24247]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0203]

Agency Information Collection Activities; New Information
Collection

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration (FMCSA) announces its plan to submit the Information
Collection Request (ICR) described below to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for its review and approval and invites public
comment. This notice invites comment on a proposed information
collection project titled Trucking Fleet Concept of Operations (CONOPS)
for Managing Mixed Fleets. It is a survey study that will assess the
self-reports of approximately 2,000 survey respondents, including
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) fleet managers, CMV sales personnel,
State and Federal government personnel, industry engineers,
researchers, and CMV drivers. The questionnaire is designed to collect
baseline opinions of automated driving systems (ADS) before and after
hands-on demonstrations with ADS technologies.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before January 4, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA-2020-0203 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Operations; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments, see
the Public Participation heading below. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Dockets: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets, or go to the street
address listed above.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Public Participation: The Federal eRulemaking Portal is available
24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic
submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ``help'' section
of the Federal eRulemaking Portal website. If you want us to notify you
that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that
appears after submitting comments online. Comments received after the
comment closing date will be included in the docket and will be
considered to the extent practicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Kelly, Technology Division,
Department of Transportation, FMCSA, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: Although ADS-equipped trucks
hold the promise of increased safety, productivity, and efficiency, it
is not clear how these vehicles should be integrated into fleet
operations with conventional trucks for mixed-fleet operations.
Reflecting this issue is a question frequently asked by trucking
executives: How can I integrate ADS into my fleet operations? FMCSA
needs information from truck industry representatives regarding their
opinions and perception of ADS.
    The introduction of ADS technology on heavy trucks (Class 8
vehicles) will profoundly affect all commerce in the U.S., as the U.S.
moves more than 70% of all goods by truck. However, existing
stakeholders in the road freight ecosystem (primarily for-hire and
private truck fleets, but also shippers, brokers, truck manufacturers,
and service and maintenance providers) do not have a clear picture of
how they will implement ADS in their daily operations. At present,
technical progress in this nascent but promising technology is
outstripping the ability of truck fleets to keep up and plan for ADS
deployment. This may adversely affect adoption by truck fleets and
associated industries, resulting in the delayed achievement of safety,
productivity, and efficiency benefits of ADS-equipped trucks. If ADS
technology is to gain traction in the U.S. trucking industry, current
stakeholders and new entrants need a rigorous, data driven CONOPS.
    This project focuses on the development and demonstration of a
CONOPS for ADS-equipped trucks, which will ensure the results translate
directly to real-world settings that are of practical importance to the
trucking industry, regulators, and the public at large. Part of the
development of CONOPS includes a series of outreach events where the
public, with a focus on truck drivers and truck fleet managers, will
have the opportunity to meet ADS technology developers and original
equipment manufacturers. The outreach will also provide opportunities
to participate in hands-on technology demonstrations, such as in-
vehicle demonstrations and closed-course scenarios. Lessons learned
from this demonstration will influence all three phases of the research
to ensure the CONOPS developed is true to real-life fleet operations.
Thus, the purpose of the hands-on demonstrations: (1) Expose truck
fleet managers and other personnel, truck drivers, government
officials, insurance and inspection personnel, and the general public
to ADS; (2) collect valuable qualitative data on participants' opinions
and perceptions regarding ADS; and (3) use the data to ensure the
CONOPS covers major industry concerns.
    Data will be collected from CMV drivers, CMV fleet managers,
industry engineers, CMV sales personnel, researchers, and State and
Federal government personnel at four roadshows. The roadshows will
coincide with large conferences, such as the Technology Maintenance
Council (TMC) Annual Meeting, North American Commercial Vehicle Show,
SAE COMVEC, and Automated Vehicle Symposium. The questionnaire data
collected in Phase I of the study (pre-roadshow) will allow us to
gather baseline opinions regarding ADS technologies. Once they
participate in the hands-on demonstrations at the roadshow, we will see
if their opinions on the technologies have changed (Phase 2 or post-
roadshow).
    The research team will use cell phones to collect participant data
(adhering to cleaning procedures between each participant). The pre-
and post-study questionnaires will be loaded onto a cell phone which
will be distributed to participants at the beginning (and end) of the
roadshow. Each questionnaire will be loaded in an app format. Once the
participants submit their answers, the data will be stored on the phone
and will not be accessible until researchers download the data to a
computer.
    FMCSA conducted a pilot test with some of the proposed end-users.
This

pilot test included six end users, two researchers, one government
employee, one commercial/motor vehicle fleet representative, and two
commercial driver's license holders. Participants completed the Pre-
Roadshow Questionnaire and Post-Roadshow Questionnaire, timing
completion of each and reviewing for content and/or comprehension
issues. Based on this pilot test, FMCSA revised the Pre-Roadshow
Questionnaire and Post-Roadshow Questionnaire. Pilot test participants
indicated mean completion times of 3.5 minutes and 4.4 minutes for the
Pre-Roadshow Questionnaire and Post Roadshow Questionnaire,
respectively.
    Title: Trucking Fleet Concept of Operations (CONOPS) for Managing
Mixed Fleets.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-00XX.
    Type of Request: New collection.
    Respondents: CMV fleet managers, CMV sales personnel, State and
Federal government personnel, industry engineers, researchers, and CMV
drivers.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,000 total respondents (675 CMV
fleet managers, 150 CMV sales personnel, 600 Industry Engineers, 100
CMV Drivers, 325 State and Federal government, and 150 Researchers).
    Estimated Time per Response: 3.5 minutes for the Pre-Roadshow
Questionnaire and 4.4 minutes for the Post-Roadshow Questionnaire.
    Expiration Date: This is a new ICR.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion (if attending one of four
roadshows).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 175 hours.

                                        Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Annualized      Burden per      Annualized
              Task                  Respondents    Responses per       total         response      total burden
                                                    respondent       responses       (minutes)        hours *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV              675               1           455.5             3.5            26.6
 Fleet Managers.................
Post-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV             675               1           455.5             4.4            33.4
 Fleet Managers.................
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire:                  600               1             396             3.5            23.1
 Industry Engineers.............
Post-roadshow Questionnaire:                 600               1             396             4.4              29
 Industry Engineers.............
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV              150               1              99             3.5             5.8
 Sales Personnel................
Post-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV             150               1              99             4.4             7.3
 Sales Personnel................
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV              100               1              66             3.5             3.9
 Drivers........................
Post-roadshow Questionnaire: CMV             100               1              66             4.4             4.8
 Drivers........................
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire:                  325               1           214.5             3.5            12.5
 State and Federal Personnel....
Post-roadshow Questionnaire:                 325               1           214.5             4.4            15.7
 State and Federal Personnel....
Pre-roadshow Questionnaire:                  150               1              99             3.5             5.8
 Researchers....................
Post-roadshow Questionnaire:                 150               1              99             4.4             7.3
 Researchers....................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized Total *..........  ..............  ..............           2,660  ..............             175
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Study Total **..........  ..............  ..............           3,990  ..............             263
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Total may not equal the sum of previous items due to rounding.
** The research team plans to collect data from a maximum of 2,000 respondents over 18 months.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the performance of FMCSA's functions; (2)
the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize or include your
comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87.

Tom Keane,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research, Technology and
Registration.
[FR Doc. 2020-24247 Filed 11-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 19 (Monday, January 29, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3982-3986]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01518]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0398; FRL-9973-37--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Nonattainment New Source Review Requirements for the 2008 8-
Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland.
The revision is in response to EPA's February 3, 2017 Findings of
Failure to Submit for various requirements relating to the 2008 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). This SIP revision
is specific to nonattainment new source review (NNSR) requirements. EPA
is approving this revision in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on February 28, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0398. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Talley,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On May 8, 2017, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)
submitted on behalf of the State of Maryland a formal revision,
requesting EPA's approval for the SIP of its NNSR Certification for the
2008 Ozone Standard (Revision 17-01). The SIP revision is in response
to EPA's final 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS Findings of Failure to Submit
for NNSR requirements. See 82 FR 9158 (February 3, 2017). Specifically,
Maryland is certifying that its existing NNSR program, covering the
Baltimore Nonattainment Area (which includes Anne Arundel, Baltimore,
Carroll, Harford, and Howard Counties and the city of Baltimore), the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Nonattainment Area (which
includes Cecil County in Maryland), and the Washington, DC
Nonattainment Area (which includes Calvert, Charles, Frederick,
Montgomery, and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland) for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, is at least as stringent as the requirements at 40
CFR 51.165, as amended by the final rule titled ``Implementation of the
2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State
Implementation Plan Requirements'' (SIP Requirements Rule), for ozone
and its precursors.\1\ See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The SIP Requirements Rule addresses a range of nonattainment
area SIP requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including
requirements pertaining to attainment demonstrations, reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonably available control technology,
reasonably available control measures, major new source review,
emission inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and of
compliance with emission control measures in the SIP. The rule also
revokes the 1997 ozone NAAQS and establishes anti-backsliding
requirements.

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

A. 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.075 parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). Under
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 50.15, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
attained when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less
than or equal to 0.075 ppm.
    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA
to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS
based on the three most recent years of ambient air quality data at the
conclusion of the designation process. The Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area and the Washington, DC Area were classified as
marginal nonattainment areas, and the Baltimore Area was classified as
a moderate nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on May 21,
2012 (effective July 20, 2012) using 2008-2010 ambient air quality
data. See 77 FR 30088. On March 6, 2015, EPA issued the final SIP
Requirements Rule, which establishes the requirements that state,
tribal, and local air quality management agencies must meet as they
develop implementation plans for areas where air quality exceeds the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 12264. Areas that were designated as
marginal ozone nonattainment areas were required to attain the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS no later than July 20, 2015, based on 2012-2014
monitoring data. See 40 CFR 51.1103. The Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area and the Washington, DC Area did not attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS by July 20, 2015; however, these areas did meet the
CAA section 181(a)(5) criteria, as interpreted in 40 CFR 51.1107, for a
one-year attainment date extension. See 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016).
Therefore, on April 11, 2016, the EPA Administrator signed a final rule
extending the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Area and the
Washington, DC Area 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS attainment date from July
20, 2015 to July 20, 2016. Id.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA proposed approval of a Determination of Attainment (DOA)
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area and the Washington, DC Area on April 18, 2017,
and April 25, 2017, respectively. These proposed actions were based
on complete, certified, and quality assured ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. See 82 FR 18268
(April 18, 2017) and 82 FR 19011 (April 25, 2017). It should be
noted that a DOA does not alleviate the need for Maryland to certify
that their existing SIP approved NNSR program is as stringent as the
requirements at 40 CFR 51.165, as NNSR applies in nonattainment
areas until an area has been redesignated to attainment.
Subsequently, EPA issued final rulemaking actions on both of these
DOAs. See 82 FR 50814 (November 2, 2017) (Philadelphia Area) and 82
FR 52651 (November 14, 2017) (Washington, DC area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moderate areas, such as the Baltimore Area, are required to attain
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS no later than July 20, 2018, six years
after the effective date of the initial nonattainment designations.\3\
See 40 CFR 51.1103. The statutorily required determination of
attainment (DOA), for the Baltimore Area, which is due prior to the
attainment date for the Area, has not passed and will be addressed in a
future rulemaking action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On June 1, 2015, EPA finalized a clean data determination
(CDD) for the Baltimore Nonattainment Area. This determination was
based upon complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air
quality monitoring data that shows the Baltimore Area has monitored
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2012-2014
monitoring period. As a result of this determination, the
requirement for the Baltimore Area to submit an attainment
demonstration and associated reasonably available control measures
(RACM), reasonable further progress plans (RFP), contingency
measures, and other SIP revisions related to attainment of the
standard are suspended for as long as the area continues to attain
the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. See 80 FR 30941 (June 2, 2015). This
action did not alleviate the need for Maryland to submit a NNSR
Certification SIP revision, which is the subject of this rulemaking
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on initial nonattainment designations for the 2008 8-hour
ozone standard, as well as the March 6, 2015 final SIP Requirements
Rule, Maryland was required to develop a SIP revision addressing
certain CAA requirements for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
Washington, DC, and Baltimore Areas, and submit to EPA a NNSR
Certification SIP or SIP revision no later than 36 months after the
effective date of area designations for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(i.e., July 20, 2015). See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). EPA is taking
action on Maryland's May 8, 2017 NNSR Certification SIP revision. EPA's
analysis of how this SIP revision addresses the NNSR requirements for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is provided in Section II below.

B. 2017 Findings of Failure To Submit SIP for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS

    Areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are subject to
the general nonattainment area planning requirements of CAA section 172
and also to the ozone-specific planning requirements of CAA section
182.\4\ States in the ozone transport region (OTR), such as Maryland,
are additionally subject to the requirements outlined in CAA section
184.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Ozone nonattainment areas are classified based on the
severity of their ozone levels (as determined based on the area's
``design value,'' which represents air quality in the area for the
most recent three years). The possible classifications for ozone
nonattainment areas are Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and
Extreme. See CAA section 181(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ozone nonattainment areas in the lower classification levels have
fewer and/or less stringent mandatory air quality planning and control
requirements than those in higher classifications. For a marginal area,
such as the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Area and the
Washington, DC Area, a state is required to submit a baseline emissions
inventory, adopt a SIP requiring emissions statements from stationary
sources, and implement a NNSR program for the relevant ozone standard.
See CAA section 182(a). For a moderate area such as the Baltimore Area,
a state needs to comply with the marginal area requirements, plus
additional requirements, including the requirement to submit a
demonstration that the area will attain in six years, the requirement
to adopt and implement certain emissions controls, such as reasonably
available control technology (RACT), and the requirement for greater
emissions offsets for new or modified major stationary sources under
the state's NNSR program. For each higher ozone nonattainment
classification, a state needs to comply with all lower area
classification requirements, plus additional emissions controls and
more expansive NNSR offset requirements.
    The CAA sets out specific requirements for states in the OTR.\5\
Upon promulgation of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, states in the OTR
were required to submit a SIP revision for RACT. See 40 CFR 51.1116.
This requirement is the only recurring obligation for an OTR state upon
revision of a NAAQS, unless that state also contains some portion of a
nonattainment area for the revised NAAQS.\6\ In that case, the
nonattainment requirements described previously also apply to those
portions of that state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CAA section 184 details specific requirements for a group of
states (and the District of Columbia) that make up the OTR. States
in the OTR are required to submit RACT SIP revisions and mandate a
certain level of emissions control for the pollutants that form
ozone, even if the areas in the state meet the ozone standards.
    \6\ NNSR requirements continue to apply in the OTR. See CAA
section 184(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the March 6, 2015 SIP Requirements Rule, EPA detailed the
requirements applicable to ozone nonattainment areas, as well as
requirements that apply in the OTR, and provided specific deadlines for
SIP submittals. See 80 FR 12264.
    On February 3, 2017, EPA found that 15 states and the District of
Columbia

failed to submit SIP revisions in a timely manner to satisfy certain
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS that apply to
nonattainment areas and/or states in the OTR. See 82 FR 9158. As
explained in that rulemaking action, consistent with the CAA and EPA
regulations, these Findings of Failure to Submit established certain
deadlines for the imposition of sanctions if a state does not submit a
timely SIP revision addressing the requirements for which the finding
is being made, and for the EPA to promulgate a federal implementation
plan (FIP) to address any outstanding SIP requirements.
    EPA found that the State of Maryland failed to submit SIP revisions
in a timely matter to satisfy NNSR requirements for its marginal and
moderate nonattainment areas, specifically the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area, the Washington, DC Area, and the Baltimore Area.\7\
Maryland submitted its May 8, 2017 SIP revision to address the specific
NNSR requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, located in 40 CFR
51.160-165, as well as its obligations under EPA's February 3, 2017
Findings of Failure to Submit. EPA's analysis of how this SIP revision
addresses the NNSR requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
Findings of Failure to Submit is provided in Section II below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The EPA found that the State of Maryland also failed to
submit SIP revisions for inspection and maintenance (I/M) basic and
nitrogen oxide RACT for major sources. These SIP requirements will
be addressed in separate rulemaking actions and will not be
discussed here. See 82 FR 9158 (February 3, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 29, 2017 (82 FR 45475), EPA published a direct final
rulemaking notice (DFRN) for the State of Maryland. In the DFRN, EPA
approved the Maryland submittal pertaining to NNSR requirements for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On the same date (82 FR 45547), EPA published
a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the action. EPA published the
DFRN without prior proposal because the Agency viewed the submittals as
noncontroversial and anticipated no adverse comments. EPA explained
that if adverse comments were received during the comment period, the
DFRN would be withdrawn and all public comments received would be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the September 29, 2017
proposed rule. EPA received an adverse comment, and on November 22,
2017 (82 FR 55510) withdrew the DFRN.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    This rulemaking action is specific to Maryland's NNSR requirements.
NNSR is a preconstruction review permit program that applies to new
major stationary sources or major modifications at existing sources
located in a nonattainment area.\8\ The specific NNSR requirements for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS are located in 40 CFR 51.160-165. The SIP
Requirements Rule explained that, for each nonattainment area, a NNSR
plan or plan revision was due no later than 36 months after the July
20, 2012 effective date of area designations for the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard (i.e., July 20, 2015).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See CAA sections 172(c)(5), 173 and 182.
    \9\ With respect to states with nonattainment areas subject to a
finding of failure to submit NNSR SIP revisions, such revisions
would no longer be required if the area were redesignated to
attainment. The CAA's prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
program requirements apply in lieu of NNSR after an area is
redesignated to attainment. For areas outside the OTR, NNSR
requirements do not apply in areas designated as attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The minimum SIP requirements for NNSR permitting programs for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS are located in 40 CFR 51.165. See 40 CFR
51.1114. These NNSR program requirements include those promulgated in
the ``Phase 2 Rule'' implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (75 FR
71018 (November 29, 2005)) and the SIP Requirements Rule implementing
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under the Phase 2 Rule, the SIP for each
ozone nonattainment area must contain NNSR provisions that: Set major
source thresholds for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)-
(iv) and (2); classify physical changes as a major source if the change
would constitute a major source by itself pursuant to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3); consider any significant net emissions increase
of NOX as a significant net emissions increase for ozone
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E); consider certain increases of
VOC emissions in extreme ozone nonattainment areas as a significant net
emissions increase and a major modification for ozone pursuant to 40
CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(F); set significant emissions rates for VOC and
NOX as ozone precursors pursuant to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(x)(A)-(C) and (E); contain provisions for emissions
reductions credits pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)-(2);
provide that the requirements applicable to VOC also apply to
NOX pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(8); and set offset ratios
for VOC and NOX pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i)-(iii)
(renumbered as (a)(9)(ii)-(iv) under the SIP Requirements Rule for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS). Under the SIP Requirements Rule for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, the SIP for each ozone nonattainment area
designated nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and designated
nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on April 6, 2015, must also
contain NNSR provisions that include the anti-backsliding requirements
at 40 CFR 51.1105. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(12).
    Maryland's longstanding SIP approved NNSR program, established in
Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) Air Quality Rule COMAR 26.11.17--
Nonattainment Provisions for Major New Sources and Major Modifications,
applies to the construction and modification of major stationary
sources in nonattainment areas. In its May 8, 2017 SIP revision,
Maryland certifies that the version of the Air Quality Rule COMAR
26.11.17 in the SIP is at least as stringent as the federal NNSR
requirements for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Area, the
Washington, DC Area, and the Baltimore Area. EPA last approved
revisions to the SIP approved version of Maryland's NNSR rule in 2012
addressing, among other things, NSR Reform and NOX as a
precursor to ozone. See 77 FR 45949 (August 2, 2012).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ On August 30, 2012, EPA published a rulemaking correcting
minor errors in their August 2, 2012 final rule. The correction of
these errors did not change EPA's final action to approve the
Maryland regulations. See 77 FR 52605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that neither COMAR 26.11.17 nor Maryland's approved SIP
contain a regulatory provision pertaining to any emissions change of
VOC in extreme nonattainment areas, as specified in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(v)(F). However, Maryland has never had an area designated
extreme nonattainment for any of the ozone NAAQS, and, thus, the
Maryland SIP is not required to contain this provision until such a
time. Additionally, the anti-backsliding provisions in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(12) are not found in either COMAR 26.11.17 or the Maryland
SIP. Maryland's major stationary source thresholds were established for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment designations and remain
unchanged in Maryland's federally-approved SIP.\11\ Therefore, all of
the sources located in the 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in
Maryland are required to meet a major stationary source threshold of 25
tons or

more per year of VOC or NOX. This requirement continues to
be more stringent than the 2008 8-hour ozone standards at issue in this
action, and, thus, the above mentioned anti-backsliding requirements
are not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Baltimore Area was
classified as serious nonattainment and the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City and Washington, DC Areas were classified as moderate
nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The version of COMAR 26.11.17 that is contained in the current SIP
has not changed since the 2012 rulemaking where EPA last approved
Maryland's NNSR provisions. This version of the rule covers the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, Washington, DC, and Baltimore
Nonattainment Areas and remains adequate to meet all applicable NNSR
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 40 CFR 51.165, the
Phase 2 Rule and the SIP Requirements Rule. A detailed description of
the state submittal and EPA's evaluation is included in a technical
support document (TSD) prepared in support of this rulemaking action. A
copy of the TSD is available, upon request, from the EPA Regional
Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document or is also
available electronically within the Docket for this rulemaking action.

III. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA received one comment on the proposed approval of MDE's May 8,
2017 submittal requesting EPA's approval for the SIP of its NNSR
Certification for the 2008 Ozone Standard (Revision 17-01).
    Comment: The commenter stated that it is unclear to them how
Maryland met the requirements for a NNSR SIP for the OTR, but did not
meet the requirements for the NNSR SIP for the Baltimore and
Philadelphia areas. The commenter stated that if Maryland submitted a
SIP for the OTR that met the NNSR requirements, then how is it possible
Maryland did not meet the requirements for Philadelphia and Baltimore.
The commenter then asserted that if Maryland did not submit a NNSR SIP
for the OTR, then EPA needs to make a Finding of Failure to Submit for
Maryland to submit a NNSR SIP for OTR requirements. The commenter
further asserts that EPA should consider this comment a notice of
intent to sue EPA for failing to perform its nondiscretionary duty to
issue a Finding of Failure to Submit for Maryland's non-submission of a
NNSR SIP for OTR requirements.
    EPA Response: EPA's September 29, 2017 DFRN would have approved
Maryland's submittal of a SIP revision which specifically addressed the
NNSR permitting requirements in CAA sections 172(c) and 182(b) for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Baltimore and Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Nonattainment Areas. See 82 FR 45475.\12\ As explained in
EPA's September 29, 2017 DFRN and in this present action, the Maryland
submittal satisfies Maryland's requirement to submit a NNSR SIP
revision for the Baltimore and Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City
Nonattainment Areas in response to EPA's February 3, 2017 final 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS Findings of Failure to Submit for NNSR requirements.
See 82 FR 9158. Maryland's obligations as a member of the OTR are not
the subject of this rulemaking. Pursuant to CAA sections 182(f) and
184(b)(2), major stationary sources of VOC and NOX in the
OTR are subject to requirements applicable to major stationary sources
in moderate nonattainment with ozone NAAQS which includes NNSR
permitting requirements. The specific requirements for Maryland as an
OTR state were discussed in EPA's February 3, 2017 Findings of Failure
to Submit and will not be restated here. However, because EPA did not
propose any action related to Maryland's NNSR requirements for the OTR,
the commenter's statements related to Maryland's NNSR requirements for
the OTR are not germane to this rulemaking. As discussed in EPA's DFRN,
Maryland's NNSR provisions at COMAR 26.11.17 are in the Maryland SIP
and meet the NNSR requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
Baltimore and Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Nonattainment Areas
as identified in the SIP Requirements Rule, for ozone and its
precursors, as well as EPA's February 3, 2017 Findings of Failure to
Submit, as noted previously. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015) and 82 FR
9158, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ While not addressed by the commenter, in addition to the
Baltimore and Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Nonattainment
Areas, Maryland's submittal also addresses the Washington, DC
Nonattainment Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the assertion that EPA should consider this comment to be
the commenter's ``notice of intent'' to sue EPA for failing to perform
its nondiscretionary duty to make a Finding of Failure to Submit for a
NNSR SIP for the OTR requirements, EPA notes that requirements for
serving upon EPA a notice of intent to sue are in CAA section 304 and
in 40 CFR part 54, specifically in 40 CFR 54.2. Commenting within an
unrelated rulemaking is not appropriate service of a notice of intent
to sue pursuant to 40 CFR 54.2 and CAA section 304.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving Maryland's May 8, 2017 SIP revision addressing the
NNSR requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, Washington, DC, and Baltimore Nonattainment
Areas. EPA has concluded that the State's submission fulfills the 40
CFR 51.1114 revision requirement, meets the requirements of CAA
sections 110 and 172 and the minimum SIP requirements of 40 CFR 51.165,
as well as its obligations under EPA's February 3, 2017 Findings of
Failure to Submit. See 82 FR 9158.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, 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.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 30, 2018. 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 approving Maryland's 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
Certification SIP revision for NNSR may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: January 11, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
the entry ``2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment New Source Review
Requirements'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1070   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

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

                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS            The Baltimore Area              5/8/2017  1/29/2018, [insert
 Nonattainment New Source Review    (includes Anne Arundel,                   Federal Register
 Requirements.                      Baltimore, Carroll,                       citation].
                                    Harford, and Howard
                                    Counties and the city
                                    of Baltimore), the
                                    Philadelphia-Wilmington-
                                    Atlantic City Area
                                    (includes Cecil County
                                    in Maryland), and the
                                    Washington, DC Area
                                    (includes Calvert,
                                    Charles, Frederick,
                                    Montgomery, and Prince
                                    Georges Counties in
                                    Maryland).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-01518 Filed 1-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 189 (Wednesday, September 30, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58610-58611]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24828]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0924]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Tower Drawbridge across the
Sacramento River, mile 59.0 at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is
necessary to allow the community to participate in the 5K Walk to
Defeat ALS. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-
to-navigation position during the deviation period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on October 3,
2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2015-0924], is
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the
``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the
line associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: California Department of Transportation has
requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower Drawbridge,
mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at Sacramento, CA. The drawbridge
navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean
High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw opens on
signal from May 1 through October 31 from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and from
November 1 through April 30 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. At all other times
the draw shall open on signal if at least four hours notice is given,
as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway is
commercial and recreational.
    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position
from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on October 3, 2015, to allow the community to
participate in the 5K Walk to Defeat ALS. This temporary deviation has
been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed
temporary deviation were raised.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may
do so at any time. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies and
there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast
Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and
Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any
impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: September 15, 2015.
D.H. Sulouff,
District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-24828 Filed 9-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17748-17751]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05917]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0439; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01263-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by a report that a design deficiency was
discovered which could allow a no-back pawl to be incorrectly installed
in a horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA). This proposed AD would
require a check for part number and serial numbers of the HSTA, and if
necessary, inspection of the no-back pawl installation, and corrective
action. This proposed AD would also prohibit the installation of
affected parts. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 8,
2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0439; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400 C[ocirc]te-
Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-
855-2999; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; website bombardier.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chirayu Gupta, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-0439; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-01263-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Chirayu Gupta, Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and
Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has
issued Transport Canada AD CF-2022-55, dated September 21, 2022
(Transport Canada AD CF-2022-55) (also referred to after this as the
MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition on certain Bombardier, Inc.,
Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. The MCAI states that during an unscheduled
inspection, a design deficiency was discovered which could allow a no-
back pawl to be incorrectly installed in a HSTA. The no-back mechanism
is a primary means to prevent back driving of the HSTA, and the motor
brake assemblies (MBAs) are the secondary means. If this condition is

not corrected, a non-functioning no-back mechanism in combination with
loss of, or degraded HSTA MBA braking capability, could lead to a loss
of control of the airplane. The MCAI also states that as a mitigating
action, Transport Canada AD CF-2019-23, dated June 18, 2019, was issued
to mandate a software upgrade for the horizontal stabilizer trim
electronic control unit to verify the MBA for braking capability during
the power up test on certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10
airplanes. Transport Canada AD CF-2019-23 corresponds to FAA AD 2019-
15-04, Amendment 39-19697 (84 FR 38862, August 8, 2019) (AD 2019-15-
04).
    The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0439.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletins 100-27-20 and 350-27-
009, both Revision 1, both dated December 1, 2020. This service
information specifies procedures for a check for part number and serial
numbers of the HSTA, and if necessary, inspection of the no-back pawl
installation and corrective action. Corrective actions include
replacement of the HSTA, and a re-identification and test of the HSTA.
These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane
configurations.
    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.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority,
it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information described above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM
after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described. This proposed AD would
also prohibit the installation of affected parts.
    Regarding the corrective action for certain HSTAs, as specified in
Bombardier Service Bulletins 100-27-20 and 350-27-009, both Revision 1,
both dated December 1, 2020, rework of the HSTA is required by the
manufacturer, since this manufacturer is the only producer of the
affected part.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 703 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
               Labor cost                         Parts cost               Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170  None......................  Up to $170................        $119,510
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Labor cost                Parts cost      Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 25 work-hours x $85 per hour          $2,905  Up to $5,030.
 = $2,125.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty
coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included
all known costs in the cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    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 above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2023-0439; Project Identifier MCAI-
2022-01263-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by May 8, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10
airplanes, certificated in any category, having serial number 20003
and subsequent.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
Controls.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that a design deficiency was
discovered which could allow a no-back pawl to be incorrectly
installed in a horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA). The FAA
is issuing this AD to address incorrectly installed no-back pawls.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in a non-
functioning no-back mechanism, which, in combination with loss of or
degraded HSTA motor brake assembly (MBA) braking capability, could
lead to a loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Records Check and Corrective Actions

    Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, check the
airplane maintenance records or do a visual check to determine the
part and serial numbers of the HSTA.
    (1) If the part number is C47100-005: No further action is
required by this paragraph.
    (2) If the part number is C47100-004 and the serial number ends
with the suffix--K: No further action is required by this paragraph.
    (3) If the serial number is listed in the table referred to in
paragraph 2.B.(4) of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable Bombardier service bulletin identified in figure 1 to
paragraph (g)(3) of this AD: Within 60 months from the effective
date of this AD, inspect the HSTA no-back mechanism pawls in
accordance with paragraph 2.C. of the Accomplishment Instructions of
the applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD.

Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(3)--Applicable service information
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24MR23.002

    (i) If one or more pawls are not correctly installed: Before
further flight, replace the HSTA in accordance with paragraph 2.E.
of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service
bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD.
    (ii) If all the pawls are correctly installed, re-identify and
test the HSTA, and do all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with paragraphs 2.C.(4) and 2.F. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin identified in figure
1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD.
    (4) If the serial number is listed in the table referred to in
paragraph 2.B.(5) of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD: Within 60 months from the effective date of this
AD, add a modification plate to the HSTA in accordance with
paragraph 2.D. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this
AD.
    (5) If the records check is inconclusive, or if a visual check
instead of a records check of the HSTA was accomplished: Within 60
months from the effective date of this AD, verify the part and
serial numbers of the HSTA, and verify the modification plate, in
accordance with paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions of
the applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD.
    (i) If the HSTA has P/N C47100-005: No further action is
required by this paragraph.
    (ii) If the HSTA has P/N C47100-004 and a serial number that
ends with the suffix--K, or if the modification plate contains ``SB
C47100-27-02'' or ``SB C47100-27-03'': No further action is required
by this paragraph.
    (iii) If the serial number is listed in the table referred to in
paragraph 2.B.(4) of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD: Within 60 months from the effective date of this
AD, inspect the HSTA no-back mechanism pawls in accordance with
paragraph 2.C. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this
AD.
    (A) If one or more pawls are not correctly installed, before
further flight, before further flight, replace the HSTA in
accordance with Paragraph 2.E. of the Accomplishment Instructions of
the applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD.
    (B) If all the pawls are correctly installed, re-identify and
test the HSTA, and do all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with paragraphs 2.C.(4) and 2.F. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin identified in figure
1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD.
    (iv) If the serial number is listed in the table referred to in
paragraph 2.B.(5) of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(3) of this AD: Within 60 months from the effective date of this
AD, add a modification plate to the HSTA in accordance with
paragraph 2.D. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin identified in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this
AD.

 (h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
part identified in paragraph (h)(1) or (2) of this AD.
    (1) An HSTA with P/N C47100-003 or P/N C47100-004 that does not
have the suffix--K following the serial number.
    (2) An HSTA with a modification plate showing ``SB C47100-27-
02'' or ``SB C47100-27-03.''

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using the applicable service information identified
in paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of this AD.

    (1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-27-20, dated November 9,
2020.
    (2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 350-27-009, dated November 9,
2020.

(j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the New York ACO
Branch, mail it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, at the address identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD or
email to: [email protected]. If mailing information, also
submit information by email. Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada or Bombardier, Inc.'s Transport
Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO,
the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(k) Additional Information

    (1) Refer to Transport Canada AD CF-2022-55, dated September 21,
2022, for related information. This Transport Canada AD may be found
in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-0439.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Chirayu Gupta,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services
Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (l)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-27-20, Revision 01, dated
December 1, 2020.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 350-27-009, Revision 01, dated
December 1, 2020.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; website
bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on March 17, 2023.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-05917 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 105 (Thursday, June 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29818-29820]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11612]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92055; File No. SR-LTSE-2021-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Long-Term Stock Exchange; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to a Temporary Reduction in the Initial Listing Fee

May 27, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 18, 2021, Long-Term Stock Exchange (``LTSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    LTSE proposes a rule change to temporarily reduce by half the
schedule of Initial Listing Fees for issuers' Primary Equity Securities
on LTSE in light of the competitive market for listings and the ongoing
disruptions caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic.\3\ The Initial
Listing fees would revert to their prior levels beginning on January 1,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange originally filed to establish a fee schedule of
listing fees for issuers of primary equity securities on January 22,
2020 (SR-LTSE-2020-02). On January 30, 2020, SR-LTSE-2020-02 was
withdrawn and replaced by SR-LTSE-2020-03. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 88133 (February 6, 2020), 85 FR 8048 (February 12,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at https://longtermstockexchange.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is filing this proposed rule change to amend Rule
14.601 to temporarily reduce by half the schedule of Initial Listing
Fees for issuers' Primary Equity Securities on LTSE in light of the
competitive market for listings and the ongoing disruptions caused by
the global COVID-19 pandemic.\4\ The Initial Listing fees would revert
to their prior levels beginning on January 1, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Primary Equity Security'' means a Company's first class of
Common Stock, Ordinary Shares, Shares or Certificates of Beneficial
Interest of Trust, Limited Partnership Interests or American
Depositary Receipts (``ADRs'') or Shares (``ADSs''). See Rule
14.002(a)(24).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Initial Listing Fee
    The Initial Listing Fee in LTSE Rule 14.601(a)(1) is determined
based on the market capitalization of the Company when it lists on the
Exchange.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amount of such fee is set forth in the fee table LTSE Rule
14.601(a)(3). The Initial Listing Fee is prorated based on the number
of trading days in the year remaining at the time of a Company's
initial listing.\6\ The proposed rule change would reduce the Initial
Listing Fee in each listing tier for the remainder of 2021 by 50% while
also retaining the proration calculation as set forth in the Rule.\7\
Thus, for example, a Company with market capitalization up to $1
billion listing on LTSE on May 31, 2021, would have an Initial Listing
Fee of $44,642.50 ($75,000 x 150/252).\8\ Prior to the proposed rule
change, the Initial Listing Fee would have been $89,285.00 ($150,000 x
150/252).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See LTSE Rule 14.601(a)(1)(iv).
    \7\ The Annual Listing Fee, which would be assessed for calendar
year 2022 for a Company listing on LTSE in 2021, is not affected by
the proposed rule change.
    \8\ May 31, 2021 is the 150th trading day out of a total of 252
trading days in calendar year 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Beginning January 1, 2022, the Initial Listing Fees and Annual
Listing Fees would revert to the levels as originally adopted in Rule
14.601.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to temporarily reduce
the listing fees amount by half for the remainder of 2021. The market
for listings is highly competitive and the Exchange believes that a
temporary

reduction in fees is appropriate at this time as the Exchange is
attracting new listings. The Exchange does not believe that the
proposed temporary reduction in its Initial Listing Fees will have any
adverse impact on the amount of funds available for its regulatory
program.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act \10\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \11\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers,
and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange also believes that
the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ because it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to
protect investors and the public interest and is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the temporary reduction for the
remainder of 2021 of the Initial Listing Fee is reasonable in view of
the highly competitive market for listings and the disruptions faced by
Companies as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic. The benefits to
a Company, its shareholders and stakeholders from pursuing long-term
value creation were discussed extensively in the background and
rationale for LTSE's Long-Term Policies.\13\ While LTSE believes that
the current environment reinforces the importance for a Company to
demonstrate its commitment to long-termism and the Long-Term Policies
set forth in Rule 14.425, the Exchange also believes that a temporary
reduction in fees is appropriate in the current economic environment.
The proposed rule change applies the reduction in fees equitably in
that all price tiers are reduced by 50% and the reduced Initial Listing
Fee is available to all Companies that elect to list on LTSE in
calendar year 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86327 (July 8,
2019), 84 FR 33293 (July 12, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market
for the listing of Primary Equity Securities. The Commission has
repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the
securities markets. A temporary reduction in price contributes to the
competitive marketplace. The Exchange believes therefore that the
proposed rule change supports an open market and the national market
system, and is consistent with the public interest.

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

    LTSE does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change would
establish a temporary reduction in the schedule of Initial Listing
Fees.
    The market for listing services is highly competitive. Each listing
exchange has a different fee schedule that applies to issuers seeking
to list securities on its exchange. Issuers have the option to list
their securities on these alternative venues based on the fees charged
and the value provided by each listing. Because issuers have a choice
to list their securities on a different national securities exchange,
the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes a
burden on competition.
    Intramarket Competition. The proposed rule change would establish a
temporarily-reduced Initial Listing Fee that will be charged to all
Companies listing on LTSE on the same basis. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed, temporary fees will have any meaningful
effect on the competition among issuers listed on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which issuers can readily choose to list
securities on other exchanges and transfer listings to other exchanges
if they deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable.
Consequently, the Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intermarket competition in a manner that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange also notes that other listing venues adjust their fees
from time to time.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90519
(November 25, 2020), 85 FR 77324 (December 1, 2020) (Nasdaq's Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify Certain Annual Listing Fees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \16\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-LTSE-2021-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-LTSE-2021-03. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-LTSE-
2021-03, and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-11612 Filed 6-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P