[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 92885-92886]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30537]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Securities Act of 1933 Release No. 10266/December 14, 2016; Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 Release No. 79544/December 14, 2016]

Order Approving Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Budget
and Annual Accounting Support Fee for Calendar Year 2017

    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended (the ``Sarbanes-Oxley
Act''),\1\ established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(``PCAOB'') to oversee the audits of companies that are subject to the
securities laws, and related matters, in order to protect the interests
of investors and further the public interest in the preparation of
informative, accurate and independent audit reports. Section 982 of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the ``Dodd-
Frank Act'') \2\ amended the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to provide the PCAOB
with explicit authority to oversee auditors of broker-dealers
registered with the Commission. The PCAOB is to accomplish these goals
through registration of public accounting firms and standard setting,
inspection, and disciplinary programs. The PCAOB is subject to the
comprehensive oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.
    \2\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides that the PCAOB shall
establish a reasonable annual accounting support fee, as may be
necessary or appropriate to establish and maintain the PCAOB. Under
Section 109(f) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the aggregate annual
accounting support fee shall not exceed the PCAOB's aggregate
``recoverable budget expenses,'' which may include operating, capital
and accrued items. The PCAOB's annual budget and accounting support fee
are subject to approval by the Commission. In addition, the PCAOB must
allocate the annual accounting support fee among issuers and among
brokers and dealers.
    Section 109(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act directs the PCAOB to
establish a budget for each fiscal year in accordance with the PCAOB's
internal procedures, subject to approval by the Commission. Rule 190 of
Regulation P governs the Commission's review and approval of PCAOB
budgets and annual accounting support fees.\3\ This budget rule
provides, among other things, a timetable for the preparation and
submission of the PCAOB budget and for Commission actions related to
each budget, a description of the information that should be included
in each budget submission, limits on the PCAOB's ability to incur
expenses and obligations except as provided in the approved budget,
procedures relating to supplemental budget requests, requirements for
the PCAOB to furnish on a quarterly basis certain budget-related
information, and a list of definitions that apply to the rule and to
general discussions of PCAOB budget matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 202.190.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with the budget rule, in March 2016 the PCAOB
provided the Commission with a narrative description of its program
issues and outlook for the 2017 budget year. In response, the
Commission provided the PCAOB with economic assumptions and budgetary
guidance for the 2017 budget year. The PCAOB subsequently delivered a
preliminary budget and budget justification to the Commission. Staff
from the Commission's Office of the Chief Accountant and Office of
Financial Management dedicated a substantial amount of time to the
review and analysis of the PCAOB's programs, projects and budget
estimates; reviewed the PCAOB's estimates of 2016 actual spending; and
attended several meetings with management and staff of the

PCAOB to further develop their understanding of the PCAOB's budget and
operations. During the course of this review, Commission staff relied
upon representations and supporting documentation from the PCAOB. Based
on this review, the Commission issued a ``pass back'' letter to the
PCAOB. On November 17, 2016, the PCAOB approved its 2017 budget during
an open meeting, and subsequently submitted that budget to the
Commission for approval.
    After considering the above, the Commission did not identify any
proposed disbursements in the 2017 budget adopted by the PCAOB that are
not properly recoverable through the annual accounting support fee, and
the Commission believes that the aggregate proposed 2017 annual
accounting support fee does not exceed the PCAOB's aggregate
recoverable budget expenses for 2017. The Commission also acknowledges
the PCAOB's updated strategic plan and encourages the PCAOB to continue
keeping the Commission and its staff apprised of significant new
developments. The Commission looks forward to providing views to the
PCAOB as future updates are made to the plan. In addition, the PCAOB
should submit its 2016 annual report to the Commission by April 1,
2017.
    We understand that the Board continues to take steps to implement
improvements to the performance and management of the PCAOB's standard-
setting process. The Commission directs the PCAOB to continue to
provide timely updates throughout the year on the progress of this
initiative as well as on any significant recommended or anticipated
changes to processes or funding.
    The Commission emphasizes the importance of the PCAOB's identifying
efficiencies, process improvements, and cost savings wherever possible.
Accordingly, the Commission directs the Board to conduct a study
assessing its operational efficiency and budgetary needs and submit a
supplemental report to the Commission of the Board's assessment in
connection with the start of the 2018 budget cycle. The report should
identify any areas where specific savings may be achieved while
continuing to enable the PCAOB to fully perform its mission. The PCAOB
should submit the report to the Commission along with its 2018
budgetary outlook letter.
    As part of its review of the 2017 budget, the Commission notes that
the Board's management of the Center for Economic Analysis (``Center'')
should continue to advance the PCAOB's mission. The Commission directs
the PCAOB during 2017 to continue providing quarterly updates to the
Commission on the Center's activities and progress towards its stated
goals.
    The Commission directs the Board during 2017 to continue to provide
in its quarterly reports to the Commission detailed information about
the state of the PCAOB's information technology (``IT'') program,
including planned, estimated, and actual costs for IT projects, and the
level of involvement of consultants. These reports also should continue
to include: (a) A discussion of the Board's assessment of the IT
program; and (b) the quarterly IT report that is prepared by PCAOB
staff and submitted to the Board.
    The Commission also directs the Board during 2017 to continue to
include in its quarterly reports to the Commission information about
the PCAOB's inspections program. Such information is to include: (a)
Statistics relative to the numbers and types of firms budgeted and
expected to be inspected in 2017, including by location and by year the
inspections are required to be conducted in accordance with the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act and PCAOB rules; (b) information about the timing of
the issuance of inspections reports for domestic and non-U.S.
inspections; and (c) updates on the PCAOB's efforts to establish
cooperative arrangements with respective non-U.S. authorities for
inspections required in those countries.
    The Commission understands that the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') has determined the 2017 budget of the PCAOB to be
sequestrable under the Budget Control Act of 2011.\4\ For 2016, the
PCAOB sequestered $16 million. That amount will become available in
2017. For 2017, the sequestration amount will be $17 million.
Accordingly, the PCAOB should submit a revised spending plan for 2017
reflecting a $1 million reduction to budgeted expenditures as a result
of the increase in sequestration amount from 2016 to 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See ``OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee
Reductions for Fiscal Year 2017'', Appendix page 15 of 16 at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/jc_sequestration_report_2017_house.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has determined that the PCAOB's 2017 budget and
annual accounting support fee are consistent with Section 109 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Accordingly,
    It is ordered, pursuant to Section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
that the PCAOB budget and annual accounting support fee for calendar
year 2017 are approved.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30537 Filed 12-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 98)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 28509-28511]
[DOCID:fr21my10-18]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0430; FRL-9154-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and particulate matter (PM)
emissions primarily from indirect sources associated with new
development projects as well as NOX and PM emissions from
certain transportation and transit projects. We are approving a local
rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 6, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0430, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or Deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through  http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California.
While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lily Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4114<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
    II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What action is EPA proposing and why?
    D. EPA Recommendations to Address Deficiencies
    E. Public Comment and Final Action
    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the state submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title            Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD...............................            9510  Indirect Source Review         12/15/05        12/29/06
                                                          (ISR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 29, 2007, the submittal for SJVUAPCD Rule 9510 was deemed
by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 9510 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. PM
contributes to effects that are harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory
and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control
NOX and PM emissions.
    Rule 9510 establishes limitations on NOX and PM.
Development projects indirectly result in new emissions from mobile,
stationary, and area sources, including those from new vehicle trips,
fuel combustion from stationary and area sources, use of consumer
products, landscaping maintenance, and construction activities. The
purpose of Rule 9510 is to achieve emission reductions from new
development projects, as well as transportation and transit projects
where construction exhaust emissions are equal to or greater than 2
tons of NOX or 2 tons of PM10.
    Rule 9510 requires applicants of new development projects to reduce
construction equipment emissions and operational emissions by a
specified percentage. The reductions can be achieved through any number
of on-site measures implemented by the applicant or by paying a fee to
SJVUAPCD for all emissions in excess of the requirements. SJVUAPCD
would utilize the fees to fund off-site projects to reduce
NOX and PM emissions.
    Rule 9510 requires the submittal and approval of an application
which identifies, through the use of a computer model, the projected
air impacts of the development project and on-site mitigation measures,
and the amount of fees to be paid. EPA's technical support document
(TSD) has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    The CAA (see section 110(a)(2)(E)) requires the State and
responsible local agencies (e.g., SJVUAPCD) to have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority to carry out the SIP, including Rule 9510.
    SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and
must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193 of
the Act). Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability consistently include the following:
    1. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620,
November 25, 1992.
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' EPA-
452/R-01-001, January 2001.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    EPA believes that California and SJVUAPCD have demonstrated that
they have adequate personnel, funding, and authority to carry out the
overall SIP. EPA is aware of ongoing legal challenge by the National
Association of Home Builders (NAHB) to SJVUAPCD's legal authority to
implement Rule 9510. (See National Association of Home Builders v. San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, No. 08-17309
(9th Circuit)). In that case, NAHB asserts that the SJVUAPCD, through
Rule 9510, is attempting to establish and enforce an emissions standard
for new nonroad engines without first having received a waiver as
required by CAA section 209, 42 U.S.C. 7543. Based on the information
before EPA for Rule 9510, we believe that the SJVUAPCD has the
authority to adopt and implement Rule 9510 without such a waiver. The
TSD has more information on this issue.
    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant requirements,
policy and guidance regarding SIP relaxations since this rule does not
replace any SIP rule. However, we believe this rule is not consistent
with the relevant requirements, policy and guidance on enforceability.
The TSD has more information on this issue.

C. What action is EPA Proposing and why?

    While Rule 9510 does not meet the evaluation criteria for
enforceability, EPA is proposing to fully approve the

rule because it is directionally sound and would generally strengthen
the SIP. Rule 9510 is an important effort by SJVUAPCD to reduce
NOX and PM emissions from a sector that has not been
generally regulated and could also result in significant co-benefits by
reducing emissions of green house gases. For these reasons, EPA
recommends full SIP approval, but in light of the deficiencies also
recommends that the projected emission reductions from the rule should
not be credited in any attainment and rate of progress/reasonable
further progress demonstrations. The TSD has more information on this
recommendation.

D. EPA Recommendations to Address Deficiencies

    EPA recommendations on how to address the enforceability
deficiencies are described in the TSD.

E. Public Comment and Final Action

    EPA is proposing to fully approve it as described in section
110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public on this
proposal for the next 45 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, 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, 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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 Clean Air Act; 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: May 10, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-12281 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85655-85656]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28456]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Release No. 79370/November 21, 2016]

In the Matter of the New York Stock Exchange LLC for an Order
Granting the Approval of Proposed Rule Change Adopting Maximum Fees
Member Organizations May Charge in Connection With the Distribution of
Investment Company Shareholder Reports Pursuant to Any Electronic
Delivery Rules Adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission; Order
Scheduling Filing of Statements on Review

    On August 15, 2016, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to adopt maximum
fees NYSE member organizations may charge in connection with the
distribution of investment company shareholder reports pursuant to any
``notice and access'' electronic delivery rules adopted by the
Commission.\3\ On October 5, 2016, the Commission extended the time
period for Commission action on the proposal to November 20, 2016.\4\
On November 18, 2016, the Division of Trading and Markets took action,
pursuant to delegated authority, 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), approving the
proposed rule change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Adopting Maximum
Fees Member Organizations may Charge in Connection with the
Distribution of Investment Company Shareholder Reports Pursuant to
Any Electronic Delivery Rules Adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Release No. 78589
(August 16, 2016), 81 FR 56717 (August 22, 2016) (SR-NYSE-2016-55).
    \4\ Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission
Action on Proposed Rule Change Adopting Maximum Fees Member
Organizations May Charge in Connection with the Distribution of
Investment Company Shareholder Reports Pursuant to Any Electronic
Delivery Rules Adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Release No. 79051 (October 5,
2016), 81 FR 70449 (October 12, 2016).
    \5\ Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Adopting
Maximum Fees Member Organizations May Charge in Connection with the
Distribution of Investment Company Shareholder Reports Pursuant to
Any Electronic Delivery Rules Adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Release No. 79355
(November 18, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice 431,\6\ the Commission is

reviewing the delegated action and the November 18, 2016 order is
stayed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 201.431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to Rule of Practice 431, that
by December 7, 2016, any party or other person may file any additional
statement.
    It is further ordered that the November 18, 2016 order approving
the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2016-55) shall remain stayed pending
further order of the Commission.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-28456 Filed 11-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 37756-37757]
[DOCID:fr11jy07-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-505-000]

Trunkline LNG Company, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

July 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on June 29, 2007, Trunkline LNG Company, LLC
(TLNG) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second
Revised Volume No. 1-A, Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 5, with an effective
date of August 1, 2007.
    TLNG states that the filing is being made in accordance with
Section 19 (Fuel Reimbursement Adjustment) and Section 20 (Electric
Power Cost Adjustment) of the General Terms and Conditions of TLNG's
FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1-A.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-13457 Filed 7-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 7, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13483-13485]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5370]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0562; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-29-AD;
Amendment 39-16969; AD 2012-04-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc (RR) Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for all RR model RB211-524G2-T-19, -524G3-T-19, -524H-T-36, and -524H2-
T-19; and RB211-Trent 553-61, 553A2-61, 556-61, 556A2-61, 556B-61
556B2-61, 560-61, 560A2-61; RB211-Trent 768-60, 772-60, 772B-60; and
RB211-Trent 875-17, 877-17, 884-17, 884B-17, 892-17, 892B-17, and 895-
17 turbofan engines that have a high-pressure (HP) compressor stage 1
to 4 rotor disc with a part number (P/N) listed in Table 1 of the AD.
That AD currently requires repetitive inspections of the axial dovetail
slots, and follow-on corrective action depending on findings. Since we
issued that AD, we determined that the definition of shop visit is too
restrictive in the existing AD. This continues to require those
repetitive inspections and follow-on corrective actions. This new AD
changes the definition of a shop visit to be less restrictive. This AD
was prompted by our determination that the definition of ``shop visit''
in the existing AD is too restrictive, in that it would require
operators to inspect more often than required to ensure safety. We are
issuing this AD to detect cracks in the HP compressor stage 1 and 2
disc posts, which could result in failure of the disc post and HP
compressor blades, release of uncontained engine debris, and damage to
the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective April 11, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of April 11,
2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, England,
DE248BJ; phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-245418 or email
from http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp, or download
the publication from https://www.aeromanager.com. You may review copies
of the referenced service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-
238-7125.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
781-238-7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2011-09-07, Amendment 39-16669 (76 FR 24793,
May 3, 2011). That AD applies to the specified products. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2011 (76 FR 65136).
That NPRM proposed to continue to require initial and repetitive
fluorescent penetrant inspections of the HP compressor stage 1 to 4
rotor discs at the first shop visit after accumulating 1,000 cycles-
since-new on the stage 1 to 4 rotor discs or at the next shop visit
after the effective date of that AD, which ever occurs later. That NPRM
also proposed to continue to require repetitive inspections at every
shop visit. That NPRM also proposed to change the definition of a shop
visit to be less restrictive.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    Two commenters, the Boeing Company and American Airlines, support
the intent of the NPRM (76 FR 65136, October 20, 2011).

Request To Change From a Supersedure to a Revision

    One commenter, American Airlines, requested that we change the
proposed AD (76 FR 65136, October 20, 2011) from being an AD
supersedure to being an AD revision of the existing AD 2011-09-07 (76
FR 24793, May 3, 2011), or, have Rolls-Royce plc revise Alert Service
Bulletin (ASB) No. RB.211-72-AF964 to remove the reference to AD 2011-
09-07, so that we can reference that latest ASB revision in the AD. The
commenter stated that the ASB revision should be issued before the AD
is issued, and referenced in the AD, to avoid the burden of needing
global Alternative Methods of Compliances written.
    We do not agree. The reference to the previous AD (76 FR 24793, May
3, 2011) in ASB No. RB.211-72-AF964 is not the section of the ASB
incorporated by reference by this AD. We can not delay publishing an AD
to wait for an administrative change to a service bulletin.
Administrative updates to service bulletins are made for a variety of
reasons. These revisions are easily handled by the alternative method
of compliance process described in paragraph (i) of this AD. We did not
change the AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and

determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 371 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
will take about 20 work-hours per product to comply with this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. No parts will be required per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD on U.S.
operators to be $630,700.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2011-09-07, Amendment 39-16669 (76 FR 24793, May 3, 2011), and adding
the following new AD:

2012-04-13 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment 39-16969; Docket No. FAA-2010-
0562; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-29-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 11, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2011-09-07, Amendment 39-16669 (76 FR
24793, May 3, 2011).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) model RB211-524G2-T-19,
-524G3-T-19, -524H-T-36, and -524H2-T-19; and RB211-Trent 553-61,
553A2-61, 556-61, 556A2-61, 556B-61 556B2-61, 560-61, 560A2-61;
RB211-Trent 768-60, 772-60, 772B-60; and RB211-Trent 875-17, 877-17,
884-17, 884B-17, 892-17, 892B-17, and 895-17 turbofan engines that
have a high-pressure (HP) compressor stage 1 to 4 rotor disc with a
part number (P/N) listed in Table 1 of this AD.

 Table 1--Affected HP Compressor Stage 1 to 4 Rotor Disc P/Ns by Engine
                                  Model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            HP compressor stage 1 to 4
              Engine model                        rotor disc P/N
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) RB211-524G2-T-19, -524G3-T-19, -     FW20195, FK25502, or FW23711.
 524H-T-36, and -524H2-T-19.
(2) RB211 Trent 553-61, 553A2-61, 556-   FK30524.
 61, 556A2-61, 556B-61, 556B2-61, 560-
 61, and 560A2-61.
(3) RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and      FK22745, FK24031, FK26185,
 772B-60.                                 FK23313, FK25502, FK32129,
                                          FW20195, FW20196, FW20197,
                                          FW20638, or FW23711.
(4) RB211 Trent 875-17, 877-17, 884-17,  FK24009, FK26167, FK32580,
 884B-17, 892-17, 892B-17, and 895-17.    FW11590, or FW61622.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by our determination that the definition of
``shop visit'' in the existing AD is too restrictive, in that it
would require operators to inspect more often than required to
ensure safety. We are issuing this AD to detect cracks in the HP
compressor stage 1 and 2 disc posts, which could result in failure
of the disc post and HP compressor blades, release of uncontained
engine debris, and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) Cleaning and Inspection

    (1) Clean and perform a fluorescent penetrant inspection of the
HP compressor stage 1 to 4 rotor discs at the first shop visit after
accumulating 1,000 cycles since new on the stage 1 to 4 rotor discs
or at the next shop visit after the effective date of this AD, which
ever occurs later.
    (2) Use paragraph 3.A through 3.E.(11) of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Rolls-Royce Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. RB.211-
72-AF964, Revision 2, dated June 8, 2011, to do the inspections.
    (3) Thereafter at every engine shop visit, perform the
inspection specified by paragraph (f) of this AD.

(g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, an ``engine shop visit'' is whenever
all compressor blades are removed from the HP compressor drum.

(h) Credit for Previous Action

    A cleaning and inspection performed before the effective date of
this AD using Rolls-Royce ASB No. RB.211-72-AF964, Revision 1, dated
June 6, 2008, or Revision 2, dated June 8, 2011, satisfies a
cleaning and inspection cycle required by this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Use

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Alan Strom,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) See European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive
2009-0073R1, dated April 8, 2009, for related information.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the
following service information on the date specified:
    (i) Rolls-Royce Alert Service Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AF964,
Revision 2, dated June 8, 2011 approved for IBR April 11, 2012.
    (ii) Rolls-Royce ASB No. RB.211-72-AF964, Revision 1, dated June
6, 2008 approved for IBR June 7, 2011 (76 FR 24793, May 3, 2011).
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby,
England, DE248BJ; phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-245418
or email from http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp, or
download the publication from https://www.aeromanager.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 23, 2012.
Peter A. White,
Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-5370 Filed 3-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P