[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 24, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11184-11186]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03575]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0023; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01407-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Support and Services (Formerly
Known as Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Saab AB, Support and Services Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by a report indicating that the left-hand main
landing gear (MLG) collapsed after touchdown, causing severe damage to
the airplane. This proposed AD would require modifying the MLG
hydraulic transfer valve, as specified in a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation by
reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 12,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; 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, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in
the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0023.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0023; 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, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-
3220; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0023; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01407-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives which
is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public
docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0233, dated October 14, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0233) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Saab AB, Support and Services Model SAAB 2000 airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report indicating that the left-
hand MLG collapsed after touchdown, causing severe damage to the
airplane. The FAA is proposing this AD to address abnormal behavior of
the MLG hydraulic transfer valve due to a restriction in hydraulic
flow, which could cause the MLG hydraulic transfer valve to not
function properly and fail to retract, extend, or lock the MLG, and
possibly result in MLG collapse following landing and consequent damage
to the airplane and injury to occupants. See the MCAI for additional
background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0233 describes procedures for modifying the MLG
hydraulic transfer valve. This

modification includes installing a new relay, relocation of wiring, and
installation of new wiring, to ensure that, when the emergency
extension handle is used, the transfer valve solenoid is energized to
force the transfer valve to the ``gear down'' position. 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 the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2020-0233 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 initially 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. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2020-0233
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2020-0233 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2020-0233 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2020-
0233 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0023 after the FAA
final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this
proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,700........................          $1,875           $3,575          $28,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Saab AB, Support and Services (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab
Aeronautics): Docket No. FAA-2021-0023; Project Identifier MCAI-
2020-01407-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by April 12, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Saab AB, Support and Services Model SAAB
2000 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the left-hand
main landing gear (MLG) collapsed after touchdown, causing severe
damage to the airplane. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
abnormal behavior of the MLG hydraulic transfer valve due to a
restriction in hydraulic flow, which could cause the MLG hydraulic
transfer valve to not function properly and fail to retract, extend,
or lock the MLG, and possibly result in MLG collapse following
landing and consequent damage to the airplane and injury to
occupants.

(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 Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0233, dated October 14, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0233).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0233

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0233 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0233 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(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
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Saab AB,
Support and Services' EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those 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.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2020-0233, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; 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 material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0023.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on February 1, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-03575 Filed 2-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 244)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 76981-76982]
[DOCID:fr18de08-27]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1291; Airspace Docket No. 08-AGL-20]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Milwaukee, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace for the
Milwaukee, WI, area. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate
new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Waukesha County
Airport, Waukesha, WI. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the
safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft
operations at Waukesha County Airport. Also, a technical amendment is
being made changing the name of John H. Batten Field to John H. Batten
Airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before February 2,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2008-1291/Airspace Docket No. 08-
AGL-20, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76193-0530; telephone: (817)
222-5582.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2008-1291/
Airspace Docket No. 08-AGL-20.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's
should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by amending Class E airspace for the Milwaukee, WI,
area. Specifically, additional controlled airspace is needed for SIAPs
operations at Waukesha County Airport, Waukesha, WI. Also, John H.
Batten Field would be changed to John H. Batten Airport. The area would
be depicted on appropriate aeronautical charts.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9S, dated October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend
controlled airspace for the Milwaukee, WI area.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated October 3, 2008, and effective October 31,
2008, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 Milwaukee, WI [Amended]

Milwaukee, General Mitchell International Airport, WI
    (Lat. 42[deg]56'50'' N., long. 87[deg]53'48'' W.)
Racine, John H. Batten Airport, WI
    (Lat. 42[deg]45'40'' N., long. 87[deg]48'50'' W.)
Waukesha, Waukesha County Airport, WI
    (Lat. 43[deg]02'28'' N., long. 88[deg]14'13'' W.)
Milwaukee, Lawrence J. Timmerman Airport, WI
    (Lat. 43[deg]06'37'' N., long. 88[deg]02'04'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 8.4-mile radius of General Mitchell International Airport,
and within an 8.1-mile radius of John H. Batten Airport, and within
a 7.5-mile radius of the Waukesha County Airport, and within 2 miles
each side of the 282[deg] bearing from the Waukesha County Airport
extending from the 7.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles west of the
Waukesha County Airport, and within an 8.9-mile radius of Lawrence
J. Timmerman Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX on December 10, 2008.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8-30023 Filed 12-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45705-45706]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18754]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67509; File No. SR-BX-2012-054]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Terminate
Revenue Sharing Agreement and Delete Associated Fees

July 26, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 19, 2012, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'' or the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    BX proposes a rule change to terminate a revenue sharing program
with Correlix, Inc. (``Correlix''), and delete the associated fees set
forth in NASDAQ OMX BX Rule 7034(e). The text of the proposed rule
change is available at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at BX's
principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    BX proposes to eliminate its revenue-sharing program with Correlix,
which was adopted to provide users of the Exchange real-time analytical
tools to measure the latency of orders to and from its systems. In
2010, the Commission approved the revenue-sharing program, as well as a
flexible free trial period for new users.\3\ Under the program, the
Exchange contracted with Correlix to receive 30% of the total monthly
subscription fees received by Correlix from parties who contracted
directly with Correlix to use its RaceTeam latency measurement service
on the Exchange. The Exchange now proposes to terminate the revenue
sharing relationship with Correlix due to the lack of customer interest
in the measurement tools offered. It also proposes to delete from the
rulebook the listing of fees for the service, so as to eliminate any
confusion on the part of customers.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 63220 (November 1, 2010) 75 FR
68389 (November 5, 2010) (SR-BX-2010-072).
    \4\ The NASDAQ Stock Market recently filed a similar rule filing
eliminating its revenue sharing relationship with Correlix and
deleting from its rulebook the listing of fees for the service, due
to lack of customer interest in the tools. See Exchange Act Release
No. 67285 (June 27, 2012) 77 FR 39551 (July 3, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-
2012-74).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    BX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that the proposal is designed
to prevent fraudulent and

manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, BX believes
ending the revenue sharing agreement and eliminating the associated fee
for a product that customers have not chosen to utilize is responsive
to market participants and eliminates confusion about offered products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that terminating the revenue
sharing agreement and deleting the associated fee in the rulebook will
not burden competition since the latency measurement tools are not
currently being used by any customers.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 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). Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days
prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such
shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has
satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\10\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay and
designate the proposed rule change to become operative upon filing to
eliminate confusion on the part of potential customers regarding the
availability of the Correlix RaceTeam offering. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
represents that there are no customers currently using Correlix's
RaceTeam latency measurement service. Therefore, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change as operative upon filing with the
Commission.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-BX-2012-054 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2012-054. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2012-054 and should be
submitted on or before August 22, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-18754 Filed 7-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT NESHAP FOR COAL AND OIL FIRED ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNITS: PROPOSED RULE ( 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UUUUU)

PART A 1.0 Identification of the Information Collection ( a) Title and Number of the Information Collection.

" NESHAP for Coal and Oil Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units: Proposed Rule ( 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UUUUU)."

This is a new information collection request ( ICR) that has been assigned Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) ICR number 2137.01.

( b) Short Characterization.

Potential respondents are owners or operators of new or existing coal or oil fired electric utility steam generating units. The proposed national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants ( NESHAP) would set emission limits for mercury ( Hg)

emissions from coal fired electric utility steam generating units and for nickel ( Ni) emissions from oil fired electric utility steam generating units. For oil fired units, respondents could elect as an alternative to meeting the Ni emissions limit to burn distillate fuel oil full time. Operating limits for the air pollution control devices ( most likely electrostatic precipitators ( ESP)) used to meet the Ni emissions limit for oil fired units also would apply.

Respondents operating multiple coal fired units at their power plant would be allowed to comply with the Hg emissions limits on either an individual unit basis or by averaging the Hg emissions 2 from all of the affected coal fired units located at the plant.

Respondents operating coal fired units would demonstrate compliance with the applicable Hg emissions limit using a continuous emission monitoring system ( CEMS) or appropriate extended sampling method. Performance Specification 12A for Hg CEMS and new EPA Method 324 for Hg sampling are proposed as part of this rulemaking. Compliance with the applicable Hg emissions limit would be based on a 12 month rolling average procedure.

Respondents operating oil fired units would demonstrate initial compliance with the Ni emissions limit by conducting performance tests using EPA Method 29 and compliance certifications; continuous compliance would be demonstrated through annual repeat performance tests.

The proposed rule would require all respondents to prepare a unit specific monitoring plan and comply with its requirements.

Consistent with the NESHAP General Provisions, respondents also must prepare and follow a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan and submit one time notifications with semiannual reports of rule deviations; and maintain records of specific information ensure that the rule requirements are being achieved. An immediate report would be required if actions taken in response to a startup,

shutdown, or malfunction were not consistent with the startup,

shutdown, and malfunction plan. These requirements are listed in Attachment 1. 3 2.0 Need for and Use of the Collection ( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection.

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act ( CAA) requires that the EPA promulgate regulations for the control of hazardous air pollutants ( HAP) from listed categories of sources. Based on the Administrator's regulatory finding ( 65 FR 79285, December 20,

2000), the EPA added coal and oil fired electric utility steam generating units to the list of source categories for regulation ( 67 FR 6521, February 12, 2002). The NESHAP developed under section 112 must reflect:

... the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of [ HAP] that is achievable taking into consideration the cost of achieving the emission reduction, any nonair quality health and environmental reduction, and energy requirements. [ section 112( d)( 2)]

This level of control is commonly referred to as the maximum achievable control technology ( MACT).

Certain records and reports are necessary for the Administrator to: ( 1) confirm the compliance status of affected sources and identify new or reconstructed sources subject to the standards; and ( 2) ensure that the MACT standards are being achieved. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114 of the Act ( 42 U. S. C. 7414)

and set out and set out in the NESHAP General Provisions in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A 4 ( b) Use/ Users of the Data.

The information required by the proposed rule would be used by EPA enforcement personnel to ensure that the emission limitations are being achieved. Based on review of the recorded information at the site and the reported information, the EPA can identify facilities that may not be in compliance and decide which plants,

records, or processes should be inspected.

3.0 Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria ( a) Nonduplication.

A computer search of the Federal Information Locator System indicated that there are no similar information requests being carried out by the Federal government, with the exception of the new source performance standards for electric utilities ( which do not control HAP emissions). A similar search of the EPA's ongoing ICR's revealed no duplication of information gathering efforts.

Certain reports required by State or local agencies may duplicate information required by the proposed rule. In such cases, a copy of the report submitted to the State or local agency can be provided to the Administrator in lieu of the information that would be required in the semiannual compliance report.

( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB.

This section is not applicable because this is a rule related ICR. 5 ( c) Consultations.

The proposed rule was developed in consultation with the Permits, New Source Review, and Toxics Subcommittee Working Group of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, industry trade associations ( Electric Power Research Institute ( EPRI)) and Utility Regulatory Advisory Group ( UARG), and the Department of Energy ( DOE). For example, several meetings and telephone consultations were held with representatives from the affected plants and industry trade associations. The EPA also made information from the Working Group available to the public through a special website. Non EPA persons consulted prior to proposal are identified in Table 1.

( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection.

If the relevant information were collected less frequently,

the EPA would not be reasonably assured that an electric utility steam generating unit is in compliance with the applicable standards under the rule.

( e) General Guidelines.

None of the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6 are being exceeded.

( f) Confidentiality.

All information submitted to the EPA for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B

Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 6 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 7 TABLE 1. PERSONS CONSULTED ON THE PROPOSED INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES Contact Organization Phone Number John Paul RAPCA 937 225 4435 Patrick Raher Hogan & Hartson 202 637 5682 Praveen Amar NESCAUM 617 367 8540 Debra Jezouit Baker Botts 202 639 7728 Marc Brownstein PSEG 973 430 7196 Dan Cunningham Con Edison 212 460 2066 Larry Monroe Southern Company Generation 205 257 7772 Bill O'Sullivan New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection 609 984 1484 Martha Keating CATF 919 563 3223 Ann Berwick M. J. Bradley Associates 978 369 5533 Mike Opalinski Seminole Electric Coop 813 693 0094 Tom Natan National Environmental Trust 202 887 8828 Michael Rossler EEI 202 289 2398 David Schanbacher Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission 512 239 1228 Sandra Schubert Earthjustice 202 667 4500 John Shanahan National Mining Association 202 463 9793 Michael Shore Environmental Defense 828 254 7359 Patricio Silva Natural Resources Defense Council 202 289 2398 Jeff Smith ICAC 202 457 0911 Felice Stadler National Wildlife Federation 202 797 6692 Mike Geers Cinergy 513 287 3839 Richard Wilson National Environmental Strategies 202 333 2524 Claudia O'Brien Latham and Watkins Lee Zeugin Hunton & Williams 202 955 1535 David Lamb TXU 214 812 8482 Paul Chu EPRI 650 855 2812 Ralph Roberson RMB Consulting 919 510 0376 Bill Wemhoff National Rural Electric Coop Assoc. 703 907 5824 8 Dennis James North American Coal Assoc. 701 442 5751 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979.

( g) Sensitive Questions.

This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive nature.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested ( a) Respondents/ NAIC Codes.

Potential respondents under the proposed rule are owners or operators of coal or oil fired electric utility steam generating units; natural gas fired units are not affected. The NAIC codes for this industry are 221112 " Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generating Units ( including those owned or operated by the Federal government or municipalities) and 921150 " American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Governments."

( b) Information Requested.

( i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements.

Attachment 1, Source Data and Information Requirements, summarizes the proposed recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

( ii) Respondent Activities. The respondent activities required by the proposed amendments are identified in Table 2 and introduced in section 6( a).

5.0 The Information Collected   Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management ( a) Agency Activities.

A list of Agency activities is provided in Table 3 and introduced in section 6( c).

( b) Collection Methodology and Management.

This is not relevant to this information collection request.

( c) Small Entity Flexibility.

According to the Small Business Administration size standards 9 for the NAICS categories, a small entity is a small business that,

including its affiliates, is primarily engaged in the generation,

transmission, and/ or distribution of electric energy for sale and whose total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million Megawatt hours ( MWh). The EPA has not completed a full assessment of the impacts of the proposed rule on small entities at this time. Nonetheless, we have tried to reduce the impact of the proposed rule on small facilities. We held several meetings with industry trade associations and company representatives to discuss the proposed rule and have included provisions to address their concerns. The proposed rule provides the maximum degree of flexibility and the ICR requirements are the minimum necessary to demonstrate compliance. Owners and operators of affected units would have up to 3 years to demonstrate compliance and the Administrator may grant 1 additional year if more time is needed to install controls.

( d) Collection Schedule.

The information contained in the periodic reports submitted to the EPA will be entered into the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS) database which is operated and maintained by the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Information contained in the one time only reports will be entered into the National Compliance Data System operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Data obtained during periodic visits by Agency personnel from records maintained by the respondents will be tabulated and published for internal EPA use in enforcement and compliance programs. A schedule for collection of information and publication of data is not applicable because reports are triggered by actions of the respondents.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection ( a) Estimating Respondent Burden. 10 The annual burden estimates for the additional recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the proposed rule are shown in Table 2. These numbers were derived from estimates based on EPA's experience with other NESHAP with similar compliance related information collection activities.

( b) Estimating Respondent Costs.

The information collection activities for the proposed rule are presented in Table 2.

( i) Estimating Labor Costs. Labor rates and associated costs are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) data. Technical,

management, and clerical average hourly total compensation rates for private industry workers were taken from the September 2003 E m p l o yment Cost Trends ( available at <

http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t10. htm>). Wages for whitecollar occupations are used as the basis for the labor rates with a total compensation of $ 30.70/ hour for technical, $ 44.98/ hour for managerial, and $ 19.02/ hour for clerical.

( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance ( O& M)

Costs. As shown in Table 2, the estimate annualized capital and O& M costs for the proposed rule is $ 40,784,964 per year.

( iii) Capital/ Startup vs. O& M Costs. The estimate of capital/ startup costs versus O& M costs is shown in Table 2. The annual O& M cost over the 3 year period of this ICR is $ 15,328,167 per year.

( iv) Annualizing Capital Costs. Table 2 shows an estimate of the annualized cost of capital to be $ 25,456,797 per year.

( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.

Because the information collection requirements were developed as an incidental part of standards development, no costs can be attributed to the development of the information collection requirements. Because reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the respondents are required under the NESHAP General 11 Provisions, no operational costs will be incurred by the Federal Government. Publication and distribution of the information are part of the Compliance Data System, with the result that no Federal costs can be directly attributed to the ICR. Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part of the EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program, and, therefore, is not attributable to the ICR. The only costs that the Federal government will incur are user costs associated with the analysis of the reported information, as presented in Table 3.

The Agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management ( OPM) 2003 General Schedule which excludes locality rates of pay. These rates can be obtained from Salary Table 2003 GS available on the OPM website ( available at < http:// www. opm. gov oca

03tables/ pdf/ gs h. pdf>). The government employee labor rates are $ 13.91/ hour for clerical ( GS 7, Step 1), $ 29.35 for technical ( GS

13, Step 1), and $ 40.80/ hr for management ( GS 15, Step 1).

( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs.

The EPA estimates that 568 existing electric utility power plants ( 461 coal fired power plants and 107 oil fired power plants)

would be subject to the proposed rule. Owners and operators of these plants would be required to install air pollution control and monitoring equipment, conduct initial performance tests ( if applicable), prepare the required plans, and provide one time notifications during the 3 year clearance period of this ICR. For the purpose of estimating burden, it is assumed that respondents will install and begin operation of monitoring systems in the third year following promulgation of the date ( the proposed rule actually would set the compliance date for existing units at the end of the 3 year ICR period). Details on the number of respondents affected by and assumptions made for each individual burden item are provided in the footnotes to Table 2. 12 ( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables.

( i) Respondent tally. The bottom line respondent burden hours and costs, presented in Table 2, are calculated by adding personhours per year down each column for technical, managerial, and clerical staff, and by adding down the cost column. The total annual hours are 243,418; the estimated costs is $ 7,610,083 per year including technical, management, and clerical hours. The total cost given in Table 2, including the cost of labor, capital, operation and maintenance, is $ 48,395,047 per year. The annualized cost of capital for monitoring devices is $ 25,456,797 averaged over the first three years of this ICR. Annualized costs are calculated assuming a 7 percent interest rate and a 3 year depreciation period.

Operation and maintenance costs ( excluding any labor hours given in the labor burden estimate) are estimated at $ 15,328,167 per year averaged over the 3 year period.

( ii) The Agency tally. The bottom line Agency burden hours and costs, presented in Table 3, are calculated by adding personhours per year down each column for technical, managerial, and clerical staff, and by adding down the cost column. In this case,

total cost is the sum of this total salary cost and total travel expenses for government personnel to observe compliance tests at a selected number of plants each year. The total annual hours are 23,437. The total annual cost is $ 763,127.

( iii) Variations in the annual bottom line. This section does not apply since no significant variation is anticipated.

( f) Reasons for Change in Burden.

This section does not apply because this is a new ICR.

( g) Burden Statement The average annual respondent burden per facility is estimated at 214 hours. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This 13 includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;

adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR Part 63 are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggestions for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OAR 2002 0056, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B 102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is ( 202) 566 1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ docket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, and to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select " search,", then key in the docket ID number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 14 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. OAR 2002 0056 in any correspondence.

PART B This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in data collection associated with the proposed rule. 15 ( A) ( B) ( C) ( D) ( E) ( F) ( G) ( H)

Personhours per occurrence No. of occurrences per respondent ( see note a) Personhours per respondent ( C= AxB) Respondents per year Technical personhours per year ( E= CxD) Management personhours per year ( Ex0.05) Clerical personhours per year ( Ex0.1) Costs, $

( see note b)

1. Applications N/ A 2. Surveys and studies N/ A 3. Acquisition, Installation, and Utilization of Technology and Systems A. Acquire and install Hg CEMS system for coal fired units ( see notes d, g , i) 274 1 274 154 42,043 2,102 420 $ 1,393,278 B. Acquire and install ESP operating parameter monitoring system for oil fired units ( see notes e, h, i) 128 1 128 36 4,565 228 46 $ 151,291 4. Reporting Requirements A. Read instructions ( see note c) 8 1 8 190 1,517 76 15 $ 50,283 B. Required activities i. Collect coal data for coal fired units 0.5 365 183 154 28,044 1,402 280 $ 929,361 ii. Operate Hg CEMS for coal fired units ( see notes d, g, i) 394 1 394 154 60,575 3,029 606 $ 2,007,420 iii. Calculate 12 mo. rolling average Hg emission rate for coal fired units ( see note i) 4 12 48 154 7,376 369 74 $ 244,435 iv. Supervise contractor performed Method 29 performance test for oil fired units ( see note e, h, i) 64 1 64 36 2,283 114 23 $ 75,646 v. Monitor ESP operation for oil fired units ( see notes e, h, i) 0.50 365 183 36 6,509 325 65 $ 215,709 C. Create information See 4B D. Gather existing information See 4B Burden item Table 2. ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE ( Continued) 16 E. Write reports i. Initial notification ( see note c) 2 1 2 190 379 19 4 $ 12,571 ii. Performance test/ evaluation notification ( see note c) 2 1 2 190 379 19 4 $ 12,571 iii. Initial compliance determination ( see note c) 40 1 40 190 7,587 379 76 $ 251,416 iv. Performance test/ evaluation reports ( see note c) 8 1 8 190 1,517 76 15 $ 50,283 v. Semiannual compliance report 16 2 32 568 18,176 909 182 $ 602,338 vi. Startup/ shutdown/ malfunction rpt ( see note c) 8 1 8 190 1,517 76 15 $ 50,283 5. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read instructions ( see note c) See 4A B. Plan activities ( see note c) 40 1 40 190 7,587 379 76 $ 251,416 C. Implement activities See 4B D. Develop record system ( see note c) 40 1 40 190 7,587 379 76 $ 251,416 E. Time to enter information i. Coal fired power plants ( see note i) 1 52 52 154 7,991 400 80 $ 264,804 ii. Oil fired power plants ( see note i) 1 12 12 36 428 21 4 $ 14,184 F. Time to train personnel i. Coal fired power plants ( see note i) 80 1 80 154 12,293 615 123 $ 407,391 ii. Oil fired power plants ( see note i) 40 1 40 36 1,427 71 14 $ 47,279 G. Time to adjust existing ways to comply with previously applicable requirements ( see note c) 40 1 40 190 7,587 379 76 $ 251,416 H. Time to transmit or disclose information 2 2 4 568 2,272 114 23 $ 75,292 I. Time for audits ( see note j)

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 229,640 11,482 2,296 $ 7,610,084 Annualized cost of capital ( see note k) $ 25,456,797 Operation and maintenance ( O& M) $ 15,328,167 Total ( capital recovery + O& M costs) $ 40,784,964 Table 2. ( Continued) ( Continued) 17 NOTES:

N/ A = Not applicable a. " Respondent" defined to be each individual electric utility power plants subject to rule: 461 coal fired plants and 107 oil fired plants.

b Costs are based on the following hourly total compensation rates for respondent employees: technical at $ 30.70, management at $ 44.98, and clerical at $ 19.02 as reported by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for September 2003 < http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t10. htm>.

d. Assumes on average each of the 461 coal fired power plant has 1.8 affected units with each requiring an individual CEMS ( 821 units/ 461 plants = 1.8 units per plant).

e. Assumes on average each of the 107 oil fired power plants has 2 affected units requiring individual ESP control devices ( 210 units/ 107 plants = 2 units per plant).

f. Labor hour requirements, capital costs, and O& M costs for mercury CEMS based on information in draft report titled " Cost Analysis of Mercury Monitoring Techniques"

prepared by ARCADIS G& M, Inc. for U. S. EPA Clean Air Markets Division, November 3, 2003.

g. Occurrence defined for this burden item to be total annual person hours to perform activity for CEMS at respondents coal fired plant site.

Person hours per occurrence represents estimated annual hours per one CEMS times the 1.8 unit per plant factor from note ( d).

h. Occurence defined for this burden item to be total annual person hours to perform activity for ESP at respondents oil fired plant site.

Person hours per occurrence represents estimated annual hours per one ESP times the 2.0 unit per plant factor from note ( e).

i. Assumes compliance activity begins in 3rd year following promulgation [( 461 coal fired plants/ 3 = 154, 107 oil fired plants/ 3 = 36].

j. Time for audit of Hg CEMS addresses by Relative Accuracy Test Audit ( RATA) included as part of Item 4. B. ii.

k. Annualized costs calculated assuming a 7% interest rate and a 3 year depreciation period.

Capital cost for individual Hg CEMS determined using average capital cost of Hg CEMS = $ 60,233 from note ( f) plus 30% for installation = $ 78,303.

c. One time event over the first 3 year term of the ICR following promulgation of the rule ( number shown represents 33% of the total 568 affected plants = 190 plants).

Table 2. ( Concluded) 18 ( A) ( B) ( C) ( D) ( E) ( F) ( G)

Hours per occurrence Hours per plant per year Units of plants per year Technical personhours per year ( D= BxC) Management personhours per year ( Dx0.05) Clerical personhours per year ( Dx0.1) Costs, $

( see note a)

Observe CEMS performance evaluation for coal fired units ( see notes b, d, f) 16 29 16 461 230 46 $ 23,566 Observe performance test for oil fired units ( see notes c, e, g) 16 32 4 128 64 13 $ 6,546 Repeat performance test/ evaluation  Retesting prep ( see note h) $ 0 Repeat performance test/ evaluation  Retesting ( see note h) $ 0 Litigation ( see note i) $ 0 Excess emissions enforcement activities ( see note i) $ 0 Report Review Notification of construction / reconstruction N/ A Notification of anticipated startup N/ A Notification of actual startup N/ A Notification of special compliance requirements N/ A Notification of applicability ( see note j) 4 4 190 760 380 76 $ 38,867 Notification of CEMS performance evaluation for coal fired plants ( see note j) 4 4 154 616 308 62 $ 31,503 Notification of initial performance test for oil fired plants ( see note j) 4 4 36 144 72 14 $ 7,364 CEMS Q/ A Plan for coal fired plants ( see note j) 16 16 154 2,464 1,232 246 $ 126,011 Notification of compliance status ( see note j) 4 4 190 760 380 76 $ 38,867 Semi annual compliance report 8 16 568 9,088 4,544 909 $ 464,769 NESHAP wavier application 8 8 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Compliance extension request ( see notes j, k) 8 8 19 151 76 15 $ 7,746 Emergency startup, shutdown, and malfunction report ( see notes j, l) 4 4 19 76 38 8 $ 3,887 TOTAL BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY) 14,648 7,324 1,465 $ 749,127 OTHER EXPENSES ( see note m) $ 14,000 Activity Table 3. ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST TO THE FEDERAL/ STATE GOVERNMENTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE ( Continued) NOTES:

N/ A = Not applicable a Costs are based on the following hourly rates for government employees: technical at $ 46.96, management at $ 65.28, and clerical at $ 22.26.

b Assumes EPA/ State personnel attend 10% of the CEMS performance evaluations per year beginning in 3rd year following promulgation [( 461 coal fired plants x 10% )/ 3]

c Assumes EPA/ State personnel attend 10% of the oil fired unit performance test per year beginning in 3rd year following promulgation [( 107 oil fired plants x 10% )/ 3]

d. Assumes on average each of the 461 coal fired power plant has 1.8 affected units requiring individual CEMS ( 821 units/ 461 plants = 1.8 units per plant)

f. Occurrence defined for this activity to be total annual person hours to perform activity for CEMS at respondents coal fired plant site.

Person hours per occurrence represents estimated annual hours per one CEMS times the 1.8 unit per plant factor from note ( d).

g. Occurence defined for this activity to be total annual person hours to perform activity for ESP at respondents oil fired plant site.

Person hours per occurrence represents estimated annual hours per one ESP times the 2.0 unit per plant factor from note ( e).

h Assumes no plant must repeat the performance test or CEM evaluation, as applicable, over the 3 year term of the ICR.

i. No enforcement or litigation during the 3 year term of the ICR because the rule compliance date for existing sources is 3 years after the date of rule promulgation.

k. Assumes 10% of the 568 plants request compliance extensions in 3rd year following rule promulgation [( 568 plants x 10% )/ 3]

l. Assumes 10% of the 568 plants submit SSM report in 3rd year following rule promulgation [( 568 plants x 10% )/ 3]

m. Government travel expenses to observe performance test/ evaluation based on [ 1 person x ($ 100 per diem x 2 days + $ 100 hotel x $ 400 roundtrip air fare) x 20 plants]

e. Assumes on average each of the 107 oil fired power plants has 2 affected units requiring individual ESP control devices ( 210 units/ 107 plants = 2 units per plant).

j. One time event over the first 3 year term of the ICR following promulgation of the rule ( number shown represents 33% of the total 568 affected plants = 190 plants).

19 Table 3. ( Concluded) 20 ATTACHMENT 1. SOURCE DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS Requirement Regulation citation General Provisions citation Record retention STUDIES AND PLANS Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan 63.10000( e) 63.6( e)( 3) 5 yearsa Unit specific monitoring plan 63.10008( h) N/ A 5 yearsa Site specific test plan 63.10007( a) 63.7( c) 5 yearsa Performance evaluation test plan/ report 63.10000( d) 63.8( e) 5 yearsa REPORTS Notification of fuel switch 63.10030( a) N/ A 5 yearsa Initial notification, Notification of performance evaluation, performance test, construction/ reconstruction, and compliance status 63.10030( a) 63.6( h), 63.7( b) ( c), 63.8( e)( f), 63.9( b)( h) 5 yearsa Semi annual compliance report 63.0031( b) 63.9( h) 5 yearsa Immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction report Table 4 63.6( f)( 3)( iv) 5 yearsa RECORDKEEPING Records of notifications and reports, performance tests, performance evaluations, monitoring data, performance evaluation test plan 63.10032( a) 63.10( b)( c) 5 yearsa Startup, shutdowns, and malfunctions 63.10032( a) 63.6( e)( 6) 5 yearsa Records required to demonstrate continuous compliance with emission limits 63.311( f)( 1) 63.10( b)( 2)( viii) 5 yearsa a Onsite for at least 2 years and offsite for the remaining 3 years as required by 40 CFR 63.10( b)( 1).


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 61 (Tuesday, March 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17117-17119]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07302]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 31512; 812-14367]

Princeton Private Equity Fund and Princeton Fund Advisors, LLC;
Notice of Application

March 25, 2015.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from sections 18(c)
and 18(i) of the Act and for an order pursuant to section 17(d) of the
Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.

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

    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to permit
certain registered closed-end management investment companies to issue
multiple classes of shares of beneficial interest (``Shares'') and to
impose asset-based service and/or distribution and contingent deferred
sales loads (``CDSCs'').
    Applicants: Princeton Private Equity Fund (the ``Fund'') and
Princeton Fund Advisors, LLC (the ``Adviser'') (together, the
``Applicants'').

DATES: The application was filed on October 2, 2014 and amended on
February 6, 2015.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on April 20, 2015, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for
lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act,
hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any
facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the
reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to
be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants, c/o Michael Wible,
Esq., Thompson Hine LLP, 41 S. High Street, Suite 1700, Columbus, OH
43065.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emerson S. Davis, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6868 or Daniele Marchesani, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.html or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Fund is a continuously offered non-diversified closed-end
management investment company registered under the Act and organized as
a Delaware statutory trust.
    2. The Adviser, a Delaware limited liability company, is registered
with the Commission as an investment adviser under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the ``Advisers Act''). Northern
Lights Fund Distributors, LLC, a registered broker-dealer under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (``1934 Act''), will act as
a placement agent for the Fund Northern Lights Fund Distributors, LLC
is not an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act,
of the Adviser or of the Fund.
    3. The Fund will continuously offer Shares in private placements in
reliance on the provisions of Regulation D under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended (``Securities Act'').\1\ Shares of the Fund

are not listed on any securities exchange and do not trade on an over-
the-counter system such as NASDAQ. Applicants do not expect that any
secondary market will develop for the Shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Shares of the Fund will be sold only to ``accredited
investors,'' as defined in Regulation D under the Securities Act.
The Fund reserves the right to conduct a public offering of the
Shares to accredited investors under the Securities Act in the
future. These Shares will be offered subject to minimum initial and
subsequent purchase requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Fund currently issues a single class of Shares (``Initial
Class'') at net asset value per share plus a servicing fee.\2\ The Fund
proposes to offer multiple classes of Shares at net asset value per
share that may (but would not necessarily) be subject to a front-end
sales load, an annual asset-based service and/or distribution fee, and/
or an Early Withdrawal Fee (defined below), in each case as set forth
in the Fund's Confidential Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Before relying on the relief requested in this application,
the Fund will convert the servicing fee currently charged to holders
of its current class of Shares to an asset-based service and/or
distribution fee that complies with rule 12b-1 under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. In order to provide a limited degree of liquidity to
shareholders, the Fund may from time to time offer to repurchase Shares
at their then current net asset value pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the
1934 Act pursuant to written tenders by shareholders.\3\ Repurchases
will be made at such times, in such amounts and on such terms as may be
determined by the Fund's board of trustees (the ``Board''), in its sole
discretion. The Adviser expects to ordinarily recommend that the Board
authorize the Fund to offer to repurchase Shares from shareholders
quarterly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Shares will be subject to an early repurchase fee at a rate
of 2% of the aggregate net asset value of a shareholder's Shares
repurchased by the Fund (the ``Early Withdrawal Fee'') with respect
to any repurchase of Shares from a shareholder at any time prior to
the day immediately preceding the one-year anniversary of the
shareholder's purchase of the Shares. The Early Withdrawal Fee will
equally apply to all classes of Shares of the Fund, consistent with
section 18 of the Act and rule 18f-3 thereunder. To the extent the
Fund determines to waive, impose scheduled variations of, or
eliminate the Early Withdrawal Fee, it will do so consistently with
the requirements of rule 22d-1 under the Act and the Fund's waiver
of, scheduled variation in, or elimination of, the Withdrawal Fee
will apply uniformly to all classes of shares of the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Applicants request that the order also apply to any other
continuously-offered registered closed-end management investment
company existing now or in the future, for which the Adviser or any
entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control (as the term
``control'' is defined in section 2(a)(9) of the Act) with the Adviser
acts as investment adviser, and which provides periodic liquidity with
respect to its Shares pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the 1934 Act.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Any Fund relying on this relief will do so in a manner
consistent with the terms and conditions of the application.
Applicants represent that any person presently intending to rely on
the order requested in the application is listed as an applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Applicants represent that any asset-based service and
distribution fees will comply with the provisions of rule 2830(d) of
the Conduct Rules of the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD Conduct Rule 2830'').\5\ Applicants also represent that
the Fund will disclose in its Confidential Memorandum the fees,
expenses and other characteristics of each class of Shares offered for
sale by the Confidential Memorandum, as is required for open-end,
multiple class funds under Form N-1A. As is required for open-end
funds, the Fund will disclose its expenses in shareholder reports, and
disclose any arrangements that result in breakpoints in or elimination
of sales loads in its Confidential Memorandum.\6\ The Fund will also
comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Commission or
FINRA regarding disclosure at the point of sale and in transaction
confirmations about the costs and conflicts of interest arising out of
the distribution of open-end investment company shares, and regarding
private placement memorandum disclosure of sales loads and revenue
sharing arrangements as if those requirements applied to the Fund and
the Distributor.\7\ In addition, Applicants will comply with applicable
enhanced fee disclosure requirements for fund of funds, including
registered funds of hedge funds.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ All references to NASD Conduct Rule 2830 include any
successor or replacement rule that may be adopted by FINRA.
    \6\ See Shareholder Reports and Quarterly Portfolio Disclosure
of Registered Management Investment Companies, Investment Company
Act Release No. 26372 (Feb. 27, 2004) (adopting release); and
Disclosure of Breakpoint Discounts by Mutual Funds, Investment
Company Act Release No. 26464 (June 7, 2004) (adopting release).
    \7\ See Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale Disclosure
Requirements for Transactions in Certain Mutual Funds and Other
Securities and Other Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and
Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual Funds, Investment
Company Act Release No. 26341 (Jan. 29, 2004) (proposing release).
    \8\ Fund of Funds Investments, Investment Company Act Rel. Nos.
26198 (Oct. 1, 2003) (proposing release) and 27399 (Jun. 20, 2006)
(adopting release). See also Rules 12d1-1, et seq. of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The Fund will allocate all expenses incurred by it among the
various classes of Shares based on the net assets of the Fund
attributable to each class, except that the net asset value and
expenses of each class will reflect distribution fees, service fees,
and any other incremental expenses of that class. Expenses of the Fund
allocated to a particular class of the Fund's Shares will be borne on a
pro rata basis by each outstanding Share of that class. The Fund will
comply with the provisions of rule 18f-3 as if it were an open-end
investment company.
    9. Although the Fund does not anticipate imposing CDSCs, the
Applicants would only do so in compliance with the provisions of rule
6c-10 of the Act, as if that rule applied to closed-end management
investment companies. With respect to any waiver of, scheduled
variation in, or elimination of the CDSC, the Fund will comply with
rule 22d-1 under the Act as if the Fund were an open-end investment
company.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

Multiple Classes of Shares

    1. Section 18(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that a
registered closed-end investment company may not issue or sell any
senior security if, immediately thereafter, the company has outstanding
more than one class of senior security. Applicants state that the
creation of multiple classes of Shares of the Fund may be prohibited by
section 18(c) of the Act.
    2. Section 18(i) of the Act provides that each share of stock
issued by a registered management investment company will be a voting
stock and have equal voting rights with every other outstanding voting
stock. Applicants state that permitting multiple classes of Shares of
the Fund may violate section 18(i) of the Act because each class would
be entitled to exclusive voting rights with respect to matters solely
related to that class.
    3. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that, the Commission may, by
order upon application, conditionally or unconditionally exempt any
person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons,
securities, or transactions, from any provision or provisions of the
Act or from any rule or regulation under the Act, if and to the extent
that the exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest
and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants request
exemptive relief under section 6(c) from sections 18(c) and 18(i) to
permit the Funds to issue multiple classes of Shares.
    4. Applicants also believe that the proposed allocation of expenses
and voting rights among multiple classes is equitable and will not
discriminate against any group or class of

shareholders. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangements would
permit the Fund to facilitate the distribution of Shares and provide
investors with a broader choice of shareholder options. Applicants
believe that the proposed closed-end investment company multiple class
structure does not raise the concerns underlying section 18 of the Act
to any greater degree than open-end investment companies' multiple
class structures. Applicants state that the Fund will comply with the
provisions of rule 18f-3 as if it were an open-end investment company.

CDSCs

    1. Applicants believe that the requested relief meets the standards
of section 6(c) of the Act. Rule 6c-10 under the Act permits open-end
investment companies to impose CDSCs, subject to certain conditions.
Applicants state that although the Fund does not currently intend to
impose CDSCs, the Fund will only impose a CDSC in compliance with rule
6c-10 as if that rule applied to closed-end management investment
companies. The Fund would also make required disclosures in accordance
with the requirements of Form N-1A concerning CDSCs as if the Fund were
an open-end investment company. Applicants further state that, in the
event it imposes CDSCs, the Fund will apply the CDSCs (and any waivers
or scheduled variations of the CDSCs) uniformly to all shareholders of
a given class and consistently with the requirements of rule 22d-1
under the Act.

Asset-based Service and Distribution Fees

    1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
an affiliated person of a registered investment company or an
affiliated person of such person, acting as principal, from
participating in or effecting any transaction in connection with any
joint enterprise or joint arrangement in which the investment company
participates unless the Commission issues an order permitting the
transaction. In reviewing applications submitted under section 17(d)
and rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the participation of
the investment company in a joint enterprise or joint arrangement is
consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes of the Act, and
the extent to which the participation is on a basis different from or
less advantageous than that of other participants.
    2. Rule 17d-3 under the Act provides an exemption from section
17(d) and rule 17d-1 to permit open-end investment companies to enter
into distribution arrangements pursuant to rule 12b-1 under the Act.
Applicants request an order under section 17(d) of the Act and rule
17d-1 under the Act to permit the Fund to impose asset-based service
and/or distribution fees. Applicants have agreed to comply with rules
12b-1 and 17d-3 as if those rules applied to closed-end investment
companies.

Applicants' Condition

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following condition:
    Applicants will comply with the provisions of rules 6c-10, 12b-1,
17d-3, 18f-3, and 22d-1 under the Act, as amended from time to time or
replaced, as if those rules applied to closed-end management investment
companies, and will comply with NASD Conduct Rule 2830, as amended from
time to time, as if that rule applied to all closed-end management
investment companies.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07302 Filed 3-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P