[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 40056]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17053]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2548-046]

Northbrook Lyons Falls, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, Protests,
Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Proceeding: Amendment of License.
    b. Project No.: 2548-046.
    c. Date Filed: May 15, 2015.
    d. Licensee: Northbrook Lyons Falls, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Lyons Falls Project.
    f. Location: The 8.63-Megawatt (MW) Lyons Falls Project is located
on the Moose and Black Rivers in Lewis County, New York.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Licensee Contact: Mr. Dan Parker, Northbrook Lyons Falls, LLC,
37 Alfred A. Plourde Parkway, Suite 2, Lewiston, ME 04240, Telephone:
(315) 261-2158, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Mr. M. Joseph Fayyad,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests,
recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from
the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from
the issuance date of this notice. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests and
comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to
6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2548-046.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee proposes to increase the
installed capacity at one of the project's developments, the existing
5.6 megawatt (MW) Lyons Falls Mill Development. The proposed work would
consist of: (1) Demolishing the existing four-unit primary powerhouse
and mothball the secondary single-unit powerhouse; (2) constructing a
new 60 feet long, 45 feet wide, and 40 feet high, combined intake and
trashrack structure adjacent to the river left dam abutment; (3)
constructing two 11.5-foot-diameter, 75- foot-long steel penstocks; (4)
constructing a new concrete and masonry powerhouse located along river
left, largely in the footprint of the existing primary powerhouse, with
two generating units. The proposed work at the Lyons Falls development
would increase its installed capacity from 5.6 MW to 11.2 MW and its
hydraulic capacity from 1170 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 2684 cfs.
    The licensee provided documentation that on June 1, 2015, it has
submitted a Joint Application for Permit to the New York State
Department of Conservation (NYSDEC) in support of amending the
Project's existing Section 401 Water Quality Certificate or issuing a
new Water Quality Certificate for the Project.
    l. This filing may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
call 1-866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction in the Commission's Public Reference Room located at 888
First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202)
502-8371.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.212 and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'',
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``REPLY COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS'',
``TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', or ``PRESCRIPTIONS'', as applicable; (2) set
forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number
of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name,
address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening;
and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001
through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, recommendations,
terms and conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary
basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b), and
should relate to project works which are the subject of the license
amendment. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from
the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be
served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the
particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents
with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect
the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also
serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all
other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by
proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by
the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b)
and 385.2010.

    Dated: July 7, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17053 Filed 7-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 19, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28431-28434]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12877]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0439; Product Identifier 2019-NM-037-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-22-
18, which applies to all Airbus SAS Model A330-243, -243F, -341, -342,
and -343 airplanes. AD 2012-22-18 requires repetitive inspections of
the three inner acoustic panels of both engine air intake cowls to
detect disbonding, and corrective actions if necessary. Since we issued
AD 2012-22-18, we have received additional reports of engine air inlet
cowl collapse. This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD
2012-22-18 with a reduced compliance time and reduced repetitive
inspection intervals. This proposed AD would also provide for an
optional modification that is terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. These actions are specified in a European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, which will be incorporated by reference. We are
proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 5, 2019.

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 http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
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 regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0439;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-037-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    We issued AD 2012-22-18, Amendment 39-17256 (77 FR 70366, November
26, 2012) (``AD 2012-22-18''), for all Airbus SAS Model A330-243, -
243F, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes. AD 2012-22-18 requires repetitive
inspections of the three inner acoustic panels of both engine air
intake cowls to detect disbonding, and corrective actions if necessary.
AD 2012-22-18 resulted from reports of extensive damage to engine air
intake cowls as a result of acoustic panel detachment. We issued AD
2012-22-18 to address disbonding, which could result in detachment of
the engine air intake cowl from the engine leading to ingestion of
parts, which could cause failure of the engine, and possible injury to
persons on the ground.

Actions Since AD 2012-22-18 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2012-22-18, we have received additional reports
of engine air inlet cowl collapse and made a determination that there
should be a reduction of the existing compliance time and repetitive
inspection intervals required by AD 2012-22-18.
    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0042, dated February 27, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0042'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS Model A330-243, A330-243F, A330-341, A330-
342 and A330-343 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported on A330 aeroplanes fitted with Rolls-
Royce Trent 700 engines, where the air inlet cowl was found with
extensive damage, as a result of acoustic panel collapse. The
technical investigation results revealed that these occurrences were
caused by panel disbonding.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to in-
flight detachment of an air inlet cowl acoustic panel, possibly
resulting in damage to the aeroplane, and/or in damage to the engine
by ingestion of parts, and/or injury to persons on the ground.
    To initially address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus
published the inspection [service bulletin] SB (original issue up to
Revision 03), to provide instructions for [special detailed
inspection] SDI of the three acoustic panels of air inlet cowl.
Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011-0173 [which corresponds to FAA AD
2012-22-18] to require repetitive SDI of these air inlet cowl
acoustic panels on both engines.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Airbus developed mod 202395,
installation of improved inner acoustic panels, and published the
modification SB, which constitutes an optional terminating action
for the SDI. Consequently, EASA AD 2011-0173 was revised to
introduce this optional terminating action.
    Since that revised [EASA] AD was issued, new events of Rolls-
Royce Trent 700 engines air inlet cowl collapse have been reported.
These events only occurred on pre-mod 202395 engine air inlet cowls.
Prompted by these findings, Airbus performed new calculations of the
SDI threshold/interval values and those of the Acceptable/Repairable
Damage Limits, leading to an amended inspection programme.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2011-0173R1, which is superseded, and
requires the SDI of affected parts at amended threshold(s) and
interval(s), and, depending on findings, repair or replacement of
affected parts. This [EASA] AD also allows a post-mod aeroplane to
be modified, either partially or completely, to pre-mod
configuration [which terminates the need for the repetitive
inspections].

    The initial compliance time for the special detailed inspection is
within 12 months after an installation or inspection, or 6 months after
the effective date of the AD, whichever occurs later; but not to exceed
24 months since the last inspection. The compliance times for the
corrective action are before further flight and before 10 flight cycles
since the last inspection, depending on the condition. The repetitive
inspection interval is 12 months.

Explanation of Retained Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the
requirements of AD 2012-22-18, this proposed AD would retain all of the
requirements of AD 2012-22-18, except the existing compliance time and
repetitive inspection intervals are reduced. Those requirements are
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0042, which, in turn, is referenced in
paragraph (g) of this proposed AD.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0042 describes procedures for repetitive inspections
of engine air inlet cowls having certain part numbers, repair or
replacement of any engine air inlet cowl that has disbonding, and an
optional modification that terminates the need for the repetitive
inspections. This material 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 and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced
above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent
information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to
exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2019-0042 described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to
use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for
compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. As a result,
EASA AD 2019-0042 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with the
provisions specified in EASA AD 2019-0042, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Service information specified in EASA AD 2019-0042 that is required for
compliance with EASA AD 2019-0042 will be available on the internet
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2019-0439 after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 47 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Cost per
             Action                  Labor cost        Parts cost        product        Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2012-   Up to 20 work-                  $0          $1,700  Up to $79,900.
 22-18.                           hours x $85 per
                                  hour = Up to
                                  $1,700.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Estimated Costs for Optional Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Labor cost             Parts cost         Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 154 work hours x $85                (*)  Up to $13,090.*
 per hour = Up to $13,090.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We have received no definitive data on the parts costs for the
  optional actions.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition
action that would be required based on the results of any required
actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need this on-condition action:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Labor cost             Parts cost         Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 34 work-hours x $85 per             (*)  Up to $2,890.*
 hour = Up to $2,890.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We have received no definitive data on the parts costs for the on-
  condition actions.

    The new requirements of this proposed AD add no additional economic
burden. However, the optional modification, if done, would result in
additional costs as specified in the ``Estimate costs for optional
actions'' table.

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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the
Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the 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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2012-22-18, Amendment 39-17256 (77 FR 70366, November 26, 2012), and
adding the following new AD:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2019-0439; Product Identifier 2019-NM-
037-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by August 5, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces 2012-22-18, Amendment 39-17256 (77 FR 70366,
November 26, 2012) (``AD 2012-22-18'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A330-243, -243F, -341, -
342, and -343 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 71, Powerplant.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of extensive damage to engine
air intake cowls as a result of acoustic panel collapse. We are
issuing this AD to address disbonding, which could result in
detachment of the engine air intake cowl from the engine, leading to
ingestion of parts, which could cause failure of the engine, and
possible injury to persons on the ground.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-
0042, dated February 27, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0042'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0042

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2019-0042 refers to its effective date,
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0042 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2019-0042
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (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, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0042 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2019-0042, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this EASA AD at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. EASA AD 2019-0042 may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2019-0439.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 10, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-12877 Filed 6-18-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 225)]
[Notices]
[Page 61393-61395]
[DOCID:fr24no09-87]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61016; File No. SR-ISE-2009-96]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Extend the Pilot Program To Expose All-Or-None Orders Until
December 31, 2009

November 17, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 13, 2009, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend its rules to implement a
broadcast message that will inform market participants when a non-
marketable all-or-none limit order is placed on the limit order book.
The text of the proposed rule change is as follows, with deletions in
[brackets] and additions italicized:

Rule 717. Limitations on Orders

* * * * *

Supplementary Material to Rule 717

    .01-.03 No Change.
    .04 A non-marketable all-or-none limit order shall be deemed
``exposed'' for the purposes of paragraphs (d) and (e) one second
following a broadcast notifying [members] market participants that
such an order to buy or sell a specified number of contracts at a
specified price has been received in the options series. This
provision shall be in effect on a pilot basis expiring [November 9,
2009] December 31, 2009.
* * * * *

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 of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    (a) Purpose--Pursuant to ISE Rule 717(d) and (e), Electronic Access
Members must expose agency orders on the Exchange for at least one
second before entering a contra-side proprietary order or a contra-side
order that was solicited from a broker-dealer, or utilize one of the
Exchange's execution mechanisms that have one second exposure periods
built into the functionality.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See ISE Rule 716(d) (Facilitation Mechanism), Rule 716(e)
(Solicited Order Mechanism) and Rule 723 (Price Improvement
Mechanism for Crossing Transactions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates an integrated system that consolidates all
market maker quotes and orders, and automatically disseminates the best
bid and offer. If a limit order is designated as all-or-none (``AON''),
the contingency that the order must be executed in full makes it
ineligible for display in the best bid or offer. Nevertheless, such
orders are maintained in the system and remain available for execution
after all other trading interest at the same price has been
exhausted.\4\ Upon the receipt of a non-marketable all-or-none limit
order, the system automatically will send a broadcast message to all
market participants notifying them that an all-or-none order to buy or
to sell a specified number of contracts at a specified price has been
placed on the book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Supplementary Material .02 to ISE Rule 713.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 9, 2009, the Exchange adopted a proposed rule change on a
three-month pilot basis to specify that a non-marketable all-or-none
limit order is deemed ``exposed'' for the purposes of Rule 717(d) and
(e) one second following a broadcast notifying members that such an
order to buy or sell a specified number of contracts at a specified
price has been received in the options series. The Exchange
subsequently extended the pilot, which is set to expire on November 9,
2009.\5\ The Exchange now proposes to extend the pilot through the end
of the year, until December 31, 2009. During the extension, the
broadcast message will be made available to any market participant, not
just members.\6\ Thus, all of the terms of the order will be disclosed
to all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60866 (October 22,
2009), 74 FR 55879 (October 29, 2009).
    \6\ The AON broadcast message is available through the
Exchange's application programming interface (``API''). Any member
or non-member connecting to the API can receive the AON broadcast
message. The Exchange is not proposing to adopt a fee associated
with receiving this message, and any future fee would be filed with
the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Basis--The basis under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') for this proposed rule change is the requirement
under Section 6(b)(5) that an exchange have rules that are designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and
a national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. In particular, under the proposed rule change all-or-
none orders will continue to be exposed to all market participants so
that there is a greater opportunity for them to interact with such
orders.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\9\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \10\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. ISE has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that
waiver of the operative delay will permit the pilot to continue until
December 31, 2009 without further delay, and will provide all market
participants, instead of only ISE members, with the opportunity to
receive ISE's broadcast message with information about the terms of new
AON orders. The Commission also notes that no comments were received to
date on the existing pilot. For these reasons, the Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, and designates the
proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the
Commission.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Exchange satisfied this requirement.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

    Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
    Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include File No.
SR-ISE-2009-96 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

    Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission,

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2009-96. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2009-96 and should be
submitted on or before December 15, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-28098 Filed 11-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 149)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38899-38901]
[DOCID:fr05au09-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0168; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-33-AD;
Amendment 39-15977; AD 2009-15-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. Model AB139 and AW139
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
specified Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters.
This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
aviation authority of Italy, with which we have a bilateral agreement,
states in the MCAI that during the installation of a fire extinguisher
bottle on a new helicopter, it was found that the electrical
receptacle/connectors on the bottle which commands the firing of the
extinguishing agent were swapped between engines No. 1 and No. 2. This
condition could affect helicopters already in service and fire
extinguisher bottles of the same part number in stock as spare parts.
If not corrected, an improperly wired fire extinguishing bottle might
cause the extinguishing agent to be discharged toward the unselected
engine when the system is activated, rather than toward the engine with
the fire. This AD requires determining if each engine has the proper
outlet end on the electrical receptacle/connector that attaches the
firing cartridge to the fire extinguisher bottle, and if not, replacing
the fire extinguisher bottle. This AD is intended to prevent the fire
extinguishing agent from not discharging toward the engine with the
fire, which could result in loss of the helicopter due to an engine
fire.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on September 9, 2009.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications is approved
by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 9, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations office, U.S.
Department of Transportation, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You may get the service information identified in this AD from
Agusta, Via Giovanni Agusta, 520 21017 Cascina Costa di Samarate (VA),
Italy, telephone 39 0331-229111, fax 39 0331-229605/222595, or at
http://customersupport.agusta.com/technical_advice.php.
    Examining The AD Docket: The AD docket contains the Notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM), the economic evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address and operating hours
for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) are in the
ADDRESSES section of this AD. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after they are received.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Strasburger, Aviation Safety
Engineer FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
would apply to Agusta Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters on February 19,
2009. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2009
(74 FR 9971). That NPRM proposed to require determining if each engine
has the proper outlet end on the electrical receptacle/connector that
attaches the firing cartridge to the fire extinguisher bottle, and if
not, replacing the fire extinguisher bottle. The proposed AD

actions are intended to prevent the fire extinguishing agent from not
discharging toward the engine with the fire, which could result in loss
of the helicopter due to an engine fire. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI and any related service information
in the AD docket.

Comments

    By publishing the NPRM, we gave the public an opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. However, we received no comment on
the NPRM or on our determination of the cost to the public. Therefore,
based on our review and evaluation of the available data, we have
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed.

Relevant Service Information

    Agusta has issued Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-085, dated May 18,
2007. The actions described in the MCAI are intended to correct the
same unsafe condition as that identified in the service information.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    We have reviewed the MCAI AD and related service information and,
in general, agree with their substance. However, our AD differs from
the MCAI AD to clarify the unsafe condition and compliance
instructions. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ
substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related
service information. These differences are highlighted in the
``Differences Between the FAA AD and the MCAI AD'' section in the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 20 helicopters of U.S.
registry and that it will take about 1 work-hour per helicopter to
verify the correct installation of electrical receptacles/connectors on
the two fire extinguisher bottles. We also estimate that it will take
about 3 work-hours per helicopter to replace a fire extinguisher bottle
with the inverted electrical receptacles/connectors and that about 5%
(2 bottles) of the fire extinguisher bottles in the fleet will have to
be replaced. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. The cost of a
replacement fire extinguisher bottle is $10,300. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be
$22,680.

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 product(s) identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    Therefore, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Effective Date

2009-15-14 Agusta S.p.A.: Amendment 39-15977; Docket No. FAA-2009-
0168; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-33-AD.
    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective on
September 9, 2009.

Other Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model AB139 helicopters, serial number
(S/N) 31005 through 31054, except S/N 31007, and AW139 helicopters,
S/N 31055 through 31067, S/N 31070, and S/N 31071, certificated in
any category.

Reason

    (d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states that during the installation of a fire extinguisher bottle,
part number 3G2620V00131, on a helicopter during manufacture, it was
found that the electrical receptacle/connectors on the bottle which
commands the firing of the extinguishing agent were swapped between
engines No. 1 and No. 2. This condition could affect helicopters
already in service and fire extinguisher bottles of the same part
number in stock as spare parts. If not corrected, an improperly
wired fire extinguishing bottle might cause the extinguishing agent
to be discharged toward the unselected engine when the system is
activated, rather than toward the engine with the fire. This AD
requires determining if each engine has the proper outlet end on the
electrical receptacle/connector that attaches the firing cartridge
to the fire extinguisher bottle, and if not, replacing the fire
extinguisher bottle. This AD is intended to prevent the fire
extinguishing agent from not discharging toward the engine with the
fire, which could result in loss of the helicopter due to an engine
fire.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 3 months,
whichever occurs first, unless already done, do the following
actions.
    (1) Determine whether the fire extinguishing bottle (bottle) for
engines No. 1 and No. 2 have the proper outlet end on the electrical
receptacle/connector, which attaches the firing cartridge to the
bottle, by following steps 4. and 5. of the Compliance Instructions
in Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-085, dated May 18, 2007 (BT).
    (2) If a bottle has an electrical receptacle/connector for the
firing cartridge with an improper outlet end, before further flight,
replace the bottle with a bottle that has an electrical receptacle/
connector with a proper outlet end in accordance with step 6. of the
Compliance Instructions in the BT.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    (f) This AD uses the term ``hours time-in-service'' rather than
``flight hours.''

Other Information

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, ATTN: John
Strasburger, Aviation Safety Engineer,

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD,
if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) MCAI Ente Nazionale Per L'Aviazione Civile Airworthiness
Directive No. 2007-227, dated June 18, 2007, contains related
information.

Joint Aircraft System/Component (JASC) Code

    (i) JASC Code 2621: Fire Bottle, Fixed.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use the specified portions of Agusta Bollettino
Tecnico No. 139-085, dated May 18, 2007 to do the actions required.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Agusta, Via Giovanni Agusta, 520 21017 Cascina Costa di Samarate
(VA), Italy, telephone 39 0331-229111, fax 39 0331-229605/222595, or
at http://customersupport.agusta.com/technical_advice.php.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas; or at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 10, 2009.
Larry M. Kelly,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-18430 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41715-41716]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17527]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0680; FRL-9996-81-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for
Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (EPA ICR
Number 1893.08, OMB Control Number 2060-0430), to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR,
which is currently approved through August 31, 2019. Public comments
were previously requested, via the Federal Register, on May 30, 2018
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden

and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 16,
2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0680, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to
[email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of municipal solid waste landfills
are required to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements
for the General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), as well as the
applicable standards in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cc and 40 CFR part 62
Subpart GGG. This includes submitting initial notifications,
performance tests and periodic reports and results, and maintaining
records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period
during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are
used by EPA to determine compliance with these standards.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of privately-
owned and publicly-owned municipal solid waste landfills, as well as
for State and local agencies administering the State Plans.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60
subpart Cc and 40 CFR part 62 subpart GGG).
    Estimated number of respondents: 493 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annually and occasionally.
    Total estimated burden: 6,520 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $449,000 (per year), which includes $0 for
annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is a decrease in both the burden
hours and the Capital/O&M costs in this ICR as compared to the previous
ICR. The change in burden and cost estimates occurred as a result of
the reporting in both the 2016 NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX) and
Emissions Guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf). Most of the burdens
previously attributed to the ICR for Subpart Cc and Subpart WWW have
been accounted for in the 2016 ICRs for Subpart XXX (OMB Control Number
2060-0697) and Subpart Cf (OMB Control Number 2060-0720) to avoid
duplication of burden for identical requirements.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-17527 Filed 8-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 67973]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26732]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87679; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2019-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc; Notice of
Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule Assessed
on Members To Establish a Monthly Trading Rights Fee

December 6, 2019.
    On August 1, 2019, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend the EDGX Fee Schedule to establish a
monthly Trading Rights Fee to be assessed on Members. The proposed rule
change was immediately effective upon filing with the Commission
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\3\ The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on August 20,
2019.\4\ The Commission received one comment letter on the proposed
rule change, and one response letter from the Exchange.\5\ On September
27, 2019, the Commission temporarily suspended the proposed rule change
and instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change.\6\ On November 21, 2019, the
Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-CboeEDGX-2019-050).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86683 (August 14,
2019), 84 FR 43222.
    \5\ See Letters from: Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and
Associate General Counsel, SIFMA, dated September 12, 2019; Adrian
Griffiths, Assistant General Counsel, Cboe, dated September 25,
2019. Comment letters are available on the Commission's website at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboebyx-2019-013/srcboebyx2019013.htm.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87144; 84 FR 52925
(October 3, 2019).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\

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

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26732 Filed 12-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 39)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 9140-9141]
[DOCID:fr01mr10-26]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1100; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-37-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG (IAE)
V2500-A1, V2522-A5, V2524-A5, V2525-D5, V2527-A5, V2527E-A5, V2527M-A5,
V2528-D5, V2530-A5, and V2533-A5 Turbofan Engines; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an NPRM, which published in the Federal
Register. That NPRM applies to IAE V2500-A1, V2522-A5, V2524-A5, V2525-
D5, V2527-A5, V2527E-A5, V2527M-A5, V2528-D5, V2530-A5, and V2533-A5
turbofan engines. The docket number is incorrect in three locations.
This document corrects the docket number in those three locations. In
all other respects, the original document remains the same.

DATES: The NPRM is corrected as of March 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Dickert, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone: (781) 238-
7117, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 12, 2010 (75 FR 6860), we
published a proposed AD, FR Doc. 2010-2999, in the Federal Register.
That AD applies to IAE V2500-A1, V2522-A5, V2524-A5, V2525-D5, V2527-
A5, V2527E-A5, V2527M-A5, V2528-D5, V2530-A5, and V2533-A5 turbofan
engines. We need to make the following corrections:

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected]

    On page 6860, in the first column, under 14 CFR Part 39, ``Docket
No.

FAA-2009-0544'' is corrected to read ``Docket No. FAA-2009-1100''.
    On page 6860, in the second column, under Comments Invited, in the
fifth and sixth line, ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0544'' is corrected to read
``Docket No. FAA-2009-1100''.
    On page 6861, in the third column, after International Aero Engines
AG, ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0544'' is corrected to read ``Docket No. FAA-
2009-1100''.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 19, 2010.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-4114 Filed 2-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13610-13611]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EG11-33-000 et al.]

Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windstar Energy, LLC.............  Docket No. EG11-33-000.
Hatchet Ridge Wind 2010-B........  Docket No. EG11-34-000.
Hatchet Ridge Wind 2010-B,         Docket No. EG11-35-000.
 Hatchet Ridge Wind 2010-A.
Alta Wind II Owner Lessor C......  Docket No. EG11-36-000.
Vermont Wind, LLC................  Docket No. EG11-37-000.
Alta Wind II Owner Lessor E......  Docket No. EG11-38-000.
Alta Wind II Owner Lessor D......  Docket No. EG11-39-000.
Alta Wind II Owner Lessor B......  Docket No. EG11-40-000.
Alta Wind II Owner Lessor A......  Docket No. EG11-41-000.
Iberdrola Renewables, Inc........  Docket No. EG11-42-000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that during the month of January 2011, the status of
the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations 18 CFR 366.7(a).

    Dated: March 7, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-5709 Filed 3-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 69)]
[Notices]
[Page 18223-18224]
[DOCID:fr11ap07-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-301-155]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing

April 5, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 2, 2007, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR)
tendered for filing and approval a negotiated rate agreement between
ANR and Oneok Energy Services Company, L.P. (Oneok). The service
agreement is being filed as a negotiated rate because the parties have
agreed to a fixed reservation rate for the term of the contract. ANR
requests that the Commission accept and approve the subject filing to
be effective April 1, 2007.
    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>.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6813 Filed 4-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44658-44660]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18176]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0902; Special Conditions No. 25-521-SC]

Special Conditions: Airbus Model A350-900 Series Airplane;
Electronic Flight-Control System (EFCS) To Limit Pitch and Roll

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Airbus Model A350-
900 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design feature
associated with the electronic flight-control system (EFCS) that limits
pitch- and roll-attitude functions. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards

for this design feature. These special conditions contain the
additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary
to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: Effective Date: September 2, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Jacobsen, FAA, Airplane and
Flightcrew Interface Branch, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile (425) 227-
1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 25, 2008, Airbus applied for a type certificate for their
new Model A350-900 airplane. Later, Airbus requested, and the FAA
approved, an extension to the application for FAA type certification to
November 15, 2009. The Model A350-900 airplane has a conventional
layout with twin wing-mounted Rolls-Royce Trent XWB engines. It
features a twin-aisle, 9-abreast, economy-class layout, and
accommodates side-by-side placement of LD-3 containers in the cargo
compartment. The basic Model A350-900 airplane configuration will
accommodate 315 passengers in a standard two-class arrangement. The
design cruise speed is Mach 0.85 with a maximum take-off weight of
602,000 lbs.
    A special condition to supplement Sec.  25.143 concerning pitch and
roll limits was developed for the Airbus Model A320, A330, A340, and
A380 airplanes wherein performance of the limiting functions was
monitored throughout the flight-test program. The FAA expects similar
monitoring to take place during the A350 flight-test program to
substantiate the pitch- and roll-attitude limiting functions, and the
appropriateness of the chosen limits.

Type Certification Basis

    Under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, Airbus
must show that the Model A350-900 airplane meets the applicable
provisions of 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-
129.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model A350-900 airplane because of
a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and final
special conditions, the Model A350-900 airplane must comply with the
fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the
noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36. The FAA must issue
a finding of regulatory adequacy under section 611 of Public Law 92-
574, the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19,
under Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-certification basis
under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Airbus Model A350-900 series will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design features: an EFCS that, when operating in its
normal mode, will prevent airplane pitch attitudes greater than +30
degrees and less than -15 degrees, and roll angles greater than plus or
minus 67 degrees. In addition, positive spiral stability is introduced
for roll angles greater than 33 degrees at speeds below VMO/
MMO. At speeds greater than VMO and up to
VDF, maximum aileron-control force is limited to only 45
degrees maximum bank angle.

Discussion

    It is expected that high thrust-to-weight ratios provide the most
critical cases for the positive-pitch limit. A margin in pitch control
must be available to enable speed control in maneuvers such as climb
after takeoff, and balked landing climb. The pitch limit must not
impede likely maneuvering made necessary by collision avoidance
efforts. A negative-pitch limit must similarly not interfere with
collision-avoidance capability, or with attaining and maintaining
speeds near VMO/MMO for emergency descent.
    Spiral stability, which is introduced above 33 degrees roll angle,
and the roll limit must not restrict attaining roll angles up to 66
degrees (approximately 2.5g level turn) with flaps up and 60 degrees
(approximately 2.0g level turn) with flaps down. The implementation of
this spiral stability requires a steady aileron-control force to
maintain a constant bank angle above 33 degrees. This force must not
require excessive pilot strength as stated in Sec.  25.143(f).
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Discussion of Comments

    Notice of proposed special conditions no. 25-13-25-SC for the
Airbus Model A350-900 airplane was published in the Federal Register on
November 12, 2013 (78 FR 67320). One comment supporting the special
conditions was received. These special conditions are adopted as
proposed.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions apply to Airbus Model
A350-900 airplanes. Should Airbus apply later for a change to the type
certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or
unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that
model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on the Airbus Model A350-900 airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Airbus Model A350-900 airplanes. In
addition to Sec.  25.143, the following requirements apply:
    1. The pitch-limiting function must not impede normal maneuvering
for pitch angles up to the maximum required for normal maneuvering,
including a normal all-engines-operating takeoff, plus a suitable
margin to allow for satisfactory speed control.
    2. The pitch and roll limiting functions must not restrict or
prevent attaining pitch attitudes necessary for emergency maneuvering,
or roll angles up to 66 degrees with flaps up or 60 degrees with flaps
down. Spiral stability, which is introduced above 33 degrees roll
angle, must not require excessive pilot strength to achieve these roll-
limit angles. Other protections, which further limit the roll
capability under certain extreme angle-of-attack,

attitude, or high-speed conditions, are acceptable as long as they
allow at least 45 degrees of roll capability.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 11, 2014.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-18176 Filed 7-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5528]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01731]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP15-22-000; CP15-24-000]

Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of Extension of Comment
Period for the St. Charles Transportation and Keys Energy Projects

    On January 5, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC
or Commission) issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) to Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed St. Charles Transportation
and Keys Energy Projects and Request for Comments on Environmental
Issues. The notice solicited comments on the potential environmental
impacts of the planned project, and listed the close of the public
comment period as February 4, 2015.
    Due to a limited printing delay in the mailing of the notice, we
are extending the comment period. Please note that the scoping period
will now close on February 20, 2015.
    Please refer to the NOI for how to participate in the environmental
proceeding.

    Dated: January 23, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01731 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 39712]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17739]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers

33 CFR Part 328

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 110, 112 116, 117, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302, and 401

[EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0203; FRL-9966-81-OW]
RIN 2040-AF74

Definition of ``Waters of the United States''--Recodification of
Pre-Existing Rules; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Department of
Defense; and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; Extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S.
Department of the Army are extending the comment period for the
proposed rule ``Definition of `Waters of the United States'--
Recodification of Pre-existing Rules.'' The agencies are extending the
comment period for 30 days in response to stakeholder requests for an
extension, from August 28, 2017 to September 27, 2017.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on July 27,
2017, at 82 FR 34899, is extended. Comments must be received on or
before September 27, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2017-0203, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The agencies may publish any
comment received to the public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The
agencies will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Donna Downing, Office of Water
(4504-T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Ms. Stacey Jensen, Regulatory Community
of Practice (CECW-CO-R), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street
NW., Washington, DC 20314; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 27, 2017 (82 FR 34899), the EPA and
the U.S. Department of the Army published the proposed rule
``Definition of `Waters of the United States'--Recodification of Pre-
existing Rules'' in the Federal Register. The original deadline to
submit comments was August 28, 2017. This action extends the comment
period for 30 days. Written comments must now be received by September
27, 2017.

    Dated: August 16, 2017.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water, Environmental Protection
Agency.
    Dated: August 16, 2017.
Douglas W. Lamont,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Project Planning and Review),
performing the duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works.
[FR Doc. 2017-17739 Filed 8-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 64826]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27319]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL19-19-000, EL19-20-000, EL19-21-000]

Bayou Cove Peaking Power, LLC; Louisiana Generating LLC; Big
Cajun I Peaking Power LLC; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On December 12, 2018, the Commission issued an order in Docket Nos.
EL19-19-000, EL19-20-000, and EL19-21-000, pursuant to section 206 of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an
investigation into whether the above-captioned entities' proposed Rate
Schedules for Reactive Service may be unjust and unreasonable. Bayou
Cove Peaking Power, LLC, et al., 165 FERC 61,227 (2018).
    The refund effective date in Docket Nos. EL19-19-000, EL19-20-000,
and EL19-21-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA,
will be the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket Nos. EL19-19-
000, EL19-20-000, and EL19-21-000 must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.214 (2018), within 21 days of the date of issuance of the
order.

    Dated: December 12, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-27319 Filed 12-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


VIA E-MAIL

October 3, 2014

Mr. David Reeves
RTI International
3040 East Cornwallis Road
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709-2194

      RE:	Refractory Recycling and Disposal Cost Data

Dear Mr. Reeves:

In response to the Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA") request, the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association ("NAIMA") is pleased to provide EPA estimated cost data associated with sorting, recycling, and disposal of refractory brick.  NAIMA also provides additional information pertinent to refractory bricks.  The data and information set forth herein have been collected from NAIMA's fiber glass members.  The numbers provided herein are an aggregated average.  Since the data have been aggregated and no specific company data is identified, NAIMA is not claiming confidential business information on any data used to answer questions 1-3.

The data and information are presented here by restating the questions that were sent to NAIMA's members and then giving the answer.

Question 1:	Do you recycle the refractory bricks or dispose of them? Or both?

Answer:	NAIMA's member companies recycle used refractories that can be recycled.  Spent refractory bricks that are not recycled are disposed of properly.  The vast majority of spent refractory bricks are recycled.

Question 2:	What is the estimated cost to sort, recycle, and dispose of refractory bricks?  Please calculate the estimate based on a dollar per ton.

Answer:	Most of this data represent costs from actual furnace rebuilds or cost projections from third parties for ongoing rebuilds.  The data below are averaged:

            * Recycling  -  $143/ton
            * Hazardous Disposal  -  $343/ton
            * Non-Hazardous Disposal  -  $129/ton
            * Sorting  -  $199/ton

            * Average Cost For Sorting, Recycling, and Disposal Per Rebuild  -  $204/ton

Question 2A:	How many tons of refractory brick would be disposed or recycled in a typical furnace rebuild?

Answer:	There are many different types of furnaces with different amounts of refractory brick.  There are also different sizes of furnaces that would cause an obvious variation in the amount of spent refractory brick to be recycled or disposed.  Based on the data collected by NAIMA, the average total for tons of brick refractory sorted, recycled and disposed of is 295 tons.

Question 3:	Do you regard this cost as significant?

Answer:	It is a significant cost, but it is greatly outweighed by the cost of rebuilding the furnace.  An even far more significant cost would be cutting the life of a furnace, due to the more frequent business interruptions, more frequent capital cost incurred in rebuilds (with associated increase in depreciation), overall decrease in asset utilization, etc.

The underlying premise of this data request, as NAIMA understands it, is the notion that as refractories age there is a greater likelihood that chromium emissions will increase.  NAIMA and its members disagree with that assumption.  Emissions data is available that show chromium emissions levels lower at the end of an oxy-fuel furnace's life than at specific test times during the mid-life of that same oxy-fuel furnace.  When that same furnace was rebuilt, the chromium emissions from the new furnace were essentially the same or higher than the emission levels at the end of the furnace's life.  These results are significant because the same test methods were used for each of the testing periods.  To summarize, this data does not support the premise that there is an increase of emissions at the end of the furnace's life.

Similarly, data from another oxy-fuel furnace shows chromium emissions being variable throughout the life of the furnace, but some of the lower emissions were at the end of the furnace life.  Again, this data challenges the soundness of EPA's premise that aging refractories emit higher chromium levels.  While the oxy-fuel furnace data cited above may demonstrate that there is not a predictable curve, it certainly does not support EPA's premise that aging refractories produce increased chromium emissions.  NAIMA can provide this data to EPA as confidential business information.

Since this company data creates a different scenario than the one envisioned by EPA, NAIMA requests the opportunity to review the data that EPA may have relied upon to come to the conclusion that chromium emissions increase as the refractories age.  If EPA's conclusion was not data-based, NAIMA requests the basis upon which EPA did reach this conclusion.

NAIMA is also disturbed by EPA's assumption that cutting the life of fiber glass furnaces by one, two, or three years is a viable option.  Since the advent of chrome-based refractory, insulation manufacturers have been able to extend furnace life up to 50 percent.  The life span of a furnace is one of the most critical economic factors for a successful and economically solvent manufacturing operation and is highly dependent on the use of chrome refractories.  Losing the ability to maximize the life-time of a furnace renders wool fiber glass manufacturers non-competitive in the global market.

The cost of accelerated furnace rebuilds would be in the millions of dollars for each year lost in furnace use and the costs of accelerating rebuilds on business planning and logistics.  This would not only be economically devastating to the fiber glass insulation industry, but it would not be cost-effective for reducing hazardous air pollutants.  EPA has previously found that requiring costs over a specified dollar amount per ton of pollutant reduced to be unreasonable.  The cost of conducting a furnace rebuild before its time would be far in excess of the cost-effectiveness value EPA has found acceptable in prior Section 112 cost-effectiveness analyses and do not represent a reasonable investment for the amount of emissions reduction achieved.

This contemplated option is financially catastrophic and it is not even justified since NAIMA and its members know of no data that supports the idea that aging refractories increase chromium emissions.  In fact, NAIMA has offered data that demonstrates the converse  -  no relationship between age of refractory and chromium emissions.

This issue will be more fully challenged in NAIMA's comments on the Supplemental Proposal.

Sincerely,

Angus E. Crane
Executive Vice President, General Counsel

cc:	Ms. Susan Fairchild
      Sector Policies and Programs Division
      Metals and Minerals Group (D243-02)
      Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
      4930 Old Page Road
      Durham, NC  27703

      Keith W. Barnett
	Group Leader, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards
	Sector Policies and Programs Division, Mineral and Manufacturing Group
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
      4930 Old Page Road
      Durham, NC  27703